Post navigation

HATE BIAS CRIME

Note: This is Sector Two: Hate/Bias Crime, 1 of 5 sectors of The Qur’an Is Hate Propaganda. The Sectors will be ultimately amalgamated into one document and presented as body of information showing necessity for legal prosecution of Islam and Islamists within Canada.

Due to the immensity of the information being given, with amalgamation the document will be placed into pdf and available for easier sharing.

Because of the immensity of Sector Two I am publishing it in three parts. This is Sector Two – Part One, the first fifty-nine pages of documentation.

Phinehas

Images, words and sarcastic content necessary to fully elucidate the gravity of this topical sector and the necessity of its immediate rectification.

Sector 2: HATE/BIAS CRIME

Hate Propaganda

Hate propaganda is defined as “any communication, writing, sign or visible representation that advocates or promotes genocide or makes statements, other than in private, that promote hatred against an identifiable group”. An identifiable group is any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, national origin, ethnic origin, language, religion, age, mental disability, physical disability or sexual orientation.

We will give a few examples from Qur’an and hadith of the promotion of genocide or hatred toward some of the identifiable groups of the Canadian public that are listed above.

First, any scriptural reference to ‘unbelievers’ as being a target for this Islamic venom qualifies that reference as an identifiable group on the basis of religion. All persons no matter what they profess as religion or belief systems are ‘unbelievers or kaffir’ in the terminology of Islam.

Tabari 9:69 “Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us”. The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.

Ibn Ishaq: 992 – “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.” Muhammad’s instructions to his men prior to a military raid.

Allah states through Quran 4:56 that those who do not believe in him, “those that deny Our revelations We will burn in fire. No sooner will their skins be consumed than We shall give them other skins, so that they may truly taste the scourge. God is mighty and wise.”

Next, we shall give scripture that directly targets Christians which is an identifiable religious group.

Al-Bayyinah 98:6: “The unbelievers among the People of the Book (Bible) and the pagans shall burn for ever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures.)

In Islam, the phrase People of the Book is a term used to describe Christians and the Jews, people they also referred to as kafir meaning “unbeliever or disbeliever.”

Al-Ma’idah 5:72-73: “They do blaspheme who say: “God is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship God, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with God, – God will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrongdoers be no one to help. They do blaspheme who say: God is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word of blasphemy, verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

Now we see targeting by the religious grouping of the Jews.

Bukhari 52:177: “Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”

Tabari 7:97: “The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, ‘Kill any Jew who falls under your power.’”

Then together Christians and Jews targeted as sources of religious strife, rivalry and damnable sinners.

Al-Baqarah 2:113: “The Jews say “The Christians have nothing true to stand on, “and the Christians say, “The Jews have nothing to stand on,” although they both recite the Scripture. Thus, the polytheists speak the same as their words. But Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ.”

Al-Ma’idah 5:18: “But the Jews and the Christians say, “We are the children of Allah and His beloved.” Say, “Then why does He punish you for your sins?” Rather, you are human beings from among those He has created. He forgives whom He wills, and He punishes whom He wills. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them, and to Him is the final destination.”

When it comes to age there is no restriction to killing for Muslims and no need to avoid women and children. Muhammad states kill everyone nearby those you consider enemies. Children, older persons and non-combatants are not to be granted protection (Hima) by the jihadist.

Bukhari 52:256: “Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama: The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, “They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).” I also heard the Prophet saying, “The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle.”

The Qur’an groundwork for targeting due to sexual orientation is given in the Islamic paraphrase of the biblical account of Lot and his family fleeing Sodom. Homosexuality and its supporters are condemned as wicked transgressors of Islam and shown as judged and destroyed for their actions. It is logical to assume that all LGBT adherents are entitled to death through supporting such actions. This surah lays the groundwork.

Al-A’raf 7:80–84: “Then he, Salih, turned from them, and said: “O my people! I have indeed conveyed to you the Message of my Lord, and have given you good advice but you like not good advisers.” Remember Lout (Lot), when he said to his people: “Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Alamin (mankind and jinn’s)?“Verily, you practise your lusts on men instead of women. Nay, but you are a people transgressing beyond bounds by committing great sins.” And the answer of his people was only that they said: “Drive them out of your town, these are indeed men who want to be pure from sins!” Then We saved him and his family, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind in the torment. And We rained down on them a rain of stones. Then see what was the end of the Mujrimun (criminals, polytheists, sinners, etc.).”

And this surah clearly shows the same defiant attitude as displayed by our pack of modern sexual deviants.

Al-Ankabut 29:28–32: “And Lot, when he said to his people, “Indeed, you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you with from among the worlds. Indeed, you approach men and obstruct the road and commit in your meetings every evil.” And the answer of his people was not but they said, “Bring us the punishment of Allah, if you should be of the truthful.” He said, “My Lord, support me against the corrupting people.” And when Our messengers came to Abraham with the good tidings, they said, “Indeed, we will destroy the people of that Lot’s city. Indeed, its people have been wrongdoers.” Abraham said, “Indeed, within it is Lot.” They said, “We are more knowing of who is within it. We will surely save him and his family, except his wife. She is to be of those who remain behind.”

An-Nisa 4:16: “If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, most Merciful.”

In addition to the Qur’an, the hadiths decry homosexual practices and condemn homosexuals to death.

Sunan Abu Dawud – Book 38, Hadith 4447 & 4462
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet said: If you find anyone doing as Lot’s people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done.

Sunan Abu Dawud – Book 32, Hadith 4087
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Apostle of Allah cursed the man who dressed like a woman and the woman who dressed like a man.

Sahih Bukhari – Volume 7, Book 72, Hadith 774
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The Prophet cursed effeminate men; those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, “Turn them out of your houses.”

Sunan Ibn Majah – Book 20, Hadith 2562
It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet said concerning those who do the action of the people of Lut: “Stone the upper and the lower, stone them both.”

Bulugh al-Maram – Book 10, Hadith 1255
Ibn ‘Abbas narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever you find doing as the people of Lot did (i.e. homosexuality), kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done, and if you find anyone having sexual intercourse with animal, kill him and kill the animal.”

Sahih Muslim – Book 3, Hadith 667
‘Abd al-Rahman, the son of Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, reported from his father: The Messenger of Allah said: A man should not see the private parts of another man, and a woman should not see the private parts of another woman, and a man should not lie with another man under one covering, and a woman should not lie with another woman under one covering.

This writing Holy Qur’an Verse 7:80-84 | For the love of the Mujaddid, Imam. by Imam Rabbani forcefully expounds “Anyone who considers homosexuality as allowed in Islam, he/she is a kafir. Period. Those who preach for gay marriages to be acceptable or propose ‘Islamic’ ceremonies for them are not just apostates but rather Satanists who are Allah’s enemies.” He utilizes explicit texts showing that both male and female homosexuality is forbidden.

In video, in their own words, these staunch Islamic leaders give you accounts as to Islam and their dealings toward homosexuals.

6:15 Dr. Nakir Zaik speaks at a conference on why homosexuality is condemned by Islam.

My personal view as a Christian is easy to sum up: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22) But, I am not quite as compassionate a man as Imam Rabbani, and we are dealing with the target practice of Islam. I believe you have been well escorted about their rifle range.

It has also been made to appear that Allah wants no one with physical disabilities visible.

“ISIL issues “Fatwa” to exterminate children with Down’s Syndrome: Through monitoring and following the death incidents of children with Down’s Syndrome and congenital deformities, we were able to learn that the Shar’i Board of ISIL issued an “Oral Fatwa” to its members authorizing them to “kill newborn babies with Down’s Syndrome and congenital deformities and disabled children”. The Fatwa was issued by one of ISIL’s Shar’i judges, a Saudi judge named ” Abu Said Aljazrawi”.

The information indicates that most of the children born with Down’s Syndrome are those of foreign fighters who married Iraqi, Syrian and Asian women. We recorded more than 38 confirmed cases of killing babies with congenital deformities and Down’s Syndrome, aged between one week to three months. They were killed by either lethal injection or suffocation. Some of those killings took place in Syria and Mosul.As if it is not enough for ISIL to kill men, women and the elderly, and now, they kill children.”They killed at least 38 disabled infants and children last year –

While the foregoing killing and fatwas issue are in all likelihood true given the documentations against ISIS; I cannot state such a group to be a specific target established by Qur’an and hadith. This may just be another example of the rabid dog of Islam running a muck and consuming itself.

The foregoing scripture clearly establish that theproponents of Islam are certainly perpetrators ofHate Propaganda by legal definition in Canada. The process for prosecution is in stage of preparation and we are now going to transition to Hate Bias Through Terrorism. In doing such you can look through This link dealing with the violence manifested by Islam…. The Qur’an Verses of Violence – The Religion of Peace for many references show why the carnage of terrorism provides the footprints for the Muslim walk within.

Hate-Bias Through Terrorism

Introduction

The terms surrounding hate crimes are widely bantered about and most people have little or no true understanding of the term hate crime itself, or how it is being used to manipulate them by societal groups bent upon their own transformer agendas for one and all. There is a lot of fear mongering by groups and individuals using claims of hate crime and those made most easily fearful are truly the most ignorant among us. They are afraid of the label of hate crimes being associated with them in any manner, and this works to the advantage of minority and cultural groups that will ultimately make all morally sound Canadian communal values extant if allowed to continue.

The simple definition of terrorism is the systematic use of violence, coercion and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. The simple definition of a terrorist is a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism in any manner that frightens others. The simple fact is all genuine followers of Islam are terrorists.

Self-termed ‘moderates’ position themselves as champions against terrorism and all violence in the name of religion; but violence and terrorism in the name of Islam in particular. They have stated belief that the Qur’an does not justify suicide bombings, whereas it justifies anything that casts people into a state of terror to establish its sharia. Through the Islamic virtue of violence comes justification for the many Muslim terror bombings and the slaughter of innocent civilians. In part the theological basis for today’s suicide bombers is contained in An-Nisa 4:74: “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fights in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.” The martyrs of Islam can be killed in any manner doing battle for Allah. To deploy yourself as a human bomb to attain victory for your God is the highest duty a Muslim can aspire to, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah.

“The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called hypocrites and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad’s own martial legacy, along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.”

MUHAMMAD THE PERFECT EXAMPLE of INSANITY

A dominant belief of Islam is that a Muslim must believe every word of the Qur’an was dictated by God to Angel Gabriel and then transmitted to Muhammad. This means every word of the Qur’an is from the mouth of their god and must be obeyed without question and absolute devout obedience.

However, it appears that Muhammad himself is very shaky in this area for Allah has to ensure him that he is not insane and of great moral character. The record states that Muhammad at times fell under the spell of black magic, leaving him delusional and confused.

Bukhari 7:71:661: “Magic was worked on Allah’s Apostle and he was bewitched, so that he began to imagine doing things which in fact, he had not done.”

Al-Qalam 68: 2-6 “You are not, O Muhammad, by the favor of your Lord, a madman. And indeed, for you is a reward uninterrupted. And indeed, you are of a great moral character. So, you will see and they will see Which of you is the afflicted by a devil.

The history of Islam and what it espouses through its Prophet shows the actions of a madman, one of extremely low moral character and perhaps simply demon possessed. And still his followers are told Muhammad is the most “beautiful pattern of conduct” and example for mankind to follow.

Al Ahzab 33:21: “Yusuf Ali: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern of conduct for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.”

Watch these videos pro and con about the Perfect Man, the one we are told to emulate.

If you are going to be like Mr. Greater than All and Model for All then prepare yourself for the following:

Prepare to promote vengeance and slavery and make your motto…’you kill one of mine and I am killing one of yours’.

Al-Baqarah 2:178: “O you who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain, the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female, but if any remission is made to any one by his aggrieved brother, then prosecution for the bloodwit * should be made according to usage, and payment should be made to him in a good manner; this is an alleviation from your Lord and a mercy; so whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful chastisement.” Bloodwit is a fine or amercement paid as a composition for the shedding of blood; also, it can refer to a riot or battle wherein blood was spilled.

You now better see as the Prophet sees, for his vision is the revelation of Allah.

Al-Ma’idah 5:45: “And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation. But whoso forgoes it, in the way of charity, it shall be expiation for him. Whoso judges not by that which Allah hath revealed such are wrong-doers.”

You need to practice the tradition of Muhammad, start screaming Allah Akbar and cutting off someone’s head. In this passage, a companion of the prophet recounts an episode in which he staged a surprise ambush on a settlement. Hisham 990: “Ibn Ishaq- “I leapt upon him and cut off his head and ran in the direction of the camp shouting ‘Allah akbar’ and my two companions did likewise”.

Practice and you need not worry about squeamishness as Muslims tell us it becomes > 3:07 Just Like Killing Chickens November 1, 2016 by Dr. Bill Warner

For certain you will need the perfect man’s perfect marriage contract as described by Dr. Ahmud Al-Mu’bi, a Saudi Marriage Officiant. > 3:08 https://youtu.be/Q5t9U9r9Kfs

And you definitely need to know when to keep your perfect mouth shut to perfectly please Allah and his Prophet. Allah has three reasons for hating you for not modeling the prophets perfect mouth.

Sahih al-Bukhari 24:555: “The clerk of Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba narrated, “Muawiya wrote to Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba: Write to me something which you have heard from the Prophet.” So, Al-Mughira wrote: I heard the Prophet saying, “Allah has hated for you three things: 1. Vain talks, (useless talk) that you talk too much or about others. 2. Wasting of wealth by extravagance 3. And asking too many questions in disputed religious matters or asking others for something except in great need.”

But, no matter what you do, you will never be able to live to the high standardsthe Qur’an and hadith show about me says Muhammad. He is very happy to laud his main claim to fame as being given superiority over all other prophets in six respects.

Sahih Muslim 4:1062: Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror in the hearts of enemies: spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankindand the line of prophets is closed with me.”

As to placing ‘terror in the hearts of enemies’, Muhammad models prayer as a burning issue for us. I suppose this is just an Islamic incentive to keep you from being late for assembly.

In Sahih al-Bukhari 11:626: “Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr and the ‘Isha’ prayers and if they knew the reward for these prayers at their respective times, they would certainly present themselves in the mosques even if they had to crawl.” The Prophet added, “Certainly I decided to order the Mu’adh-dhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses.” I guess this just might instill a little terror into the less than faithful, eh?

Muhammad clearly stated that Islam will be victorious through terror and branded himself a terrorist. Bukhari 4:220: “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror cast in the hearts of the enemy, and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).”

In the light of such insanity Dr. Warner tries to provide us with knowledge that may help to reason the Muslim out of their terrorist mess.> 3:54 https://youtu.be/TT9fguD9XJE

Given our current state of affairs it is obvious that reason is not high on the list of Islamic incentives, being they are commanded to terrorise. Following are some of the scriptural directives that Allah, Qur’an and Hadith states are to be followed along their bloody pathway of terrorism. After all, “- Allah’s Apostle said… ‘I have been made victorious with terror cast in the hearts of the enemy.” (Bukhari 4:220)

Ale-Imran 151:“Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”. Those who joined companions with Allah are such persons as the Christians who added Jesus as the son and the Holy Spirit as the third personality of God.

Al-Anfal 8:12 “Remember when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”

Terrorize them to the degree that it will be remembered by those who lead them and send them out from their places of origin; or when you go into theirs.

Al-Anfal 8:57 “If thou come on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.”

Slaughter first and take prisoners later.
Al-Anfal 8:67 “It is not for a prophet to have captives of war until he inflicts a massacre upon Allah ‘s enemies in the land. Some Muslims desire the commodities of this world, but Allah desires for you the Hereafter. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.”

Hisham 484: Ibn Ishaq “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’

You might stay your killing for holy days, but as soon as over get back at it where ever you are. In 2016 the ISIS foreign outreach magazine (source) referred to the following verse urging the faithful to promote attacks in all nations.

At-Tawbah 9:5 “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.” As ISIS stated: “Allah did not only command the ‘fighting’ of disbelievers, as if to say He only wants us to conduct frontline operations against them. Rather, He has also ordered that they be slain wherever they may be – on or off the battlefield.”

At-Taubah 123. “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Al-Muttaqun (the pious).”

Al-Fath 29: “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard, ruthless against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves”. Islam is not about treating everyone equally.

Never stop jihad, never stop terrorizing until Islam is supreme.

Sahih Bukhari 8:387: Narrated Anas bin Malik: “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.”

Al-Baqarah 2:216 “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and ye know not.”

Al-Baqarah 2:244) “Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Hears and knows all things.”

Muhammad 47:35 “So, do not falter and cry out for peace when ye will be the uppermost, and Allah is with you, and He will not grudge the reward of your actions.”

No reasonable person could interpret this evidence from the Islamic Holy texts to show anything other than Islam commands violence and terrorism. Anyone denying this is truly delusional or a deliberate jihad liar.

Which one are you? You have to be one or the other if you have crawled into bed with Trudeau and crew, telling us we are to embrace Islamic insanity in any manner.

Muslim jihadists must obey the words of their book. They fear for their own lives if they do not live as terrorists, because Allah has told them in their books that they should be killed for not obeying. Fear of Allah, and the doubting of Allah in the mind of a Muslim is a brutalizing thought. They must show they believe him and that they will bring terror against all infidels, hypocrites and apostates. Ultimately, they must slay those who do not convert to Islam and those that abandon their faith. The promotion of genocide by Muslim killing Muslim is looked at here, but Islamic genocide is detailed fully in Sector Three: Genocide.

Pushed scripturally by fears the words of Allah rings in their ears:

Al-Anfal 8:65 “O Prophet, urge the believers to battle. If there are among you twenty who are steadfast, they will overcome two hundred. And if there are among you one hundred who are steadfast, they will overcome a thousand of those who have disbelieved because they are a people who do not understand.”

An-Nisa 4:76 “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Taghut *. So, fight against the allies of Satan. Indeed, the plot of Satan has ever been weak.” Taghut means to cross the limits, overstep boundaries, or to rebel through idolatry or worshiping of anything except Allah.

They are promised eternal reward if they go forth to kill.

An-Nisa 4:74 “So let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. And he who fights in the cause of Allah and is killed or achieves victory – We will bestow upon him a great reward.”

But they also know he has made the Jihad mandatory and has warned them harshly to do battle. Those who refuse to fight will be punished with Hell.

At-Taubah 9:38-39 “O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place.”

No matter how well or ill prepared they are to give everything in the cause of Islam.

At-Taubah 9:41 “Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew.”

An-Nisa 4:104 “And do not weaken in pursuit of the enemy. If you should be suffering – so are they suffering as you are suffering, but you expect from Allah that which they expect not. And Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.”

No retreat is allowed other than military manoeuvering to continue the fight.

Al-Anfal 8:15-16 “O ye who believe! When ye meet those in battle who disbelieve, turn not your backs to them. Whoso on that day turns his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey’s end.”

And to weaken in the cause of jihad is to be punished in this world and after life.

Ali ‘Imran 3:56 “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help.”

The deceptions of Islam were hidden behind language, cultural and geographic barriers for fourteen centuries. These barricades have now fallen to some degree. But, the Muslim who knows the words given in their writings knows that jihad means Holy War and they must carry out the visible carnage you see today. So, internally they are driven through fear of not doing so. While there is a great deal of posturing by the different factions within Islam surrounding jihad, they simply cannot hide from the truth of the written words unless they are a hypocrite, an apostate. And to be such is to demand their own death sentence, so the devout adherent to Islam simply has to run harder along a pathway of evil.

Their self-justifying excuse for the violence they perpetuate is that it is necessary because of the unbelief of their opposition and “Allah must have no rivals.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) The greater the opposition the greater the violence for the Muslim believes that disbelief (Al-Fitnah) in Allah far worse than any action of killing. So we see in Al Ma’idah 5:33 “the punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”

And high on the list of those who strive to make mischief in the land are the unbelieving Muslim hypocrites and apostates.

“O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.” (At-Taubah 9:73)

In Islam, politics and religion are inseparably intertwined and apostasy is equal to treason. And, the Muslim has been given a simple solution for this: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.” (Bukhari 84:57) For, “he that chooses a religion over Islam, it will not be accepted from him and in the world to come he will be one of the lost.” (Ali ‘Imran 3:85)

“And slay disbelievers wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they first fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.” (Al-Baqarah 2:191)

A Muslim is not to befriend a non-believer even if that non-believer is the father or the brother of that Muslim. If an apostate Muslim remains unrepentant then remember their command: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.” And slaughtering them prevails in and out of mosques for the world’s dominant strand of Islam, Sunni Islam, does not view its victims as Muslims; and vice versa with the Shias. They view each other as false Muslims, simply heretics who need to submit to their ‘true Islam’ or be killed. Thus, they are bound in an eternal perennial war that shall continue when both inhabit the depths of hell and the lake of fire.

At-Tawbah 9:23-24 “O you who have believed, do not take your fathers or your brothers as allies if they have preferred disbelief over belief. And whoever does so among you – then it is those who are the wrongdoers. Say, O Muhammad, “If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your relatives, wealth which you have obtained, commerce wherein you fear decline, and dwellings with which you are pleased are more beloved to you than Allah and His Messenger and jihad in His cause, then wait until Allah executes His command. And Allah does not guide the defiantly disobedient people.”

Ali ‘Imran 3:28-29 “Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever of you does that has nothing with Allah, except when taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of Himself, and to Allah is the final destination. Say, “Whether you conceal what is in your breasts or reveal it, Allah knows it. And He knows that which is in the heavens and that which is on the earth. And Allah is over all things competent.”

ISIS is birthed of mainstream Sunni Islam and when they slaughter any lesser group affiliated with Islam to varying degrees, they do so under the same exact logic as when they slaughter Israeli citizens, Christian minorities, Europeans or Americans. All persons outside their ranks are infidels who must either embrace the true faith, be subjugated or die. It is the same for Shias.

Through unbelief the Muslim faces the same death chant as does the kafir of any persuasion. So, in Hisham 992 states “Ibn Ishaq – “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.” This was given at the time Muhammad was about to clean out Medina for himself and he urged on his faithful followers. “If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a fierce slaughter. That was the Way of Allah in the case of those who passed away of old, and you will not find any change in the Way of Allah.” (Al-Ahzab 33: 60-62) The hypocrites are those who refuse to fight in the ways of Allah. Those with diseased hearts also include the Christians and the Jews and the alarmists are those who merely speak against Islam. You may find it beneficial to read the article Apostasy: “Whoever changes his (Islamic) religion, kill him” | Winds of …

So, you moderate Muslims know what fate awaits you hypocrites and apostates. Your Qur’an, your Allah condemns you: “And that He might test the hypocrites, it was said to them: “Come, fight in the Way of Allah or at least defend yourselves.” They said: “Had we known that fighting will take place, we would certainly have followed you.” They were that day, nearer to disbelief than to Faith, saying with their mouths what was not in their hearts. And Allah has full knowledge of what they conceal. They are the ones who said about their killed brethren while they themselves sat at home: “If only they had listened to us, they would not have been killed.” They say: “Avert death from your own selves, if you speak the truth.” (Ale-Imran 167-168) The scripture show that the devout Muslim is the one you claimed moderate Muslims state to be the terrorist. And they certainly are terrorists and their terrorism includes directly targeting you.

Summation

Take a good look at the typical face of a Canadian stupid to your left, gathered at a rally in downtown Calgary, Alta., Saturday, Feb. 4, 2017. This is a person capable of denying reality when all evidence shows Islam is in a perpetual internal and external conflict of inflicting terrorism worldwide.

People like dipstick truly need to check their mental oil level for they have sprung serious leaks. They are victims of their own erroneous beliefs that Islam bans Muslims from killing fellow Muslims in its name and Islam is a religion of Peace. Wrong on both counts they rattle onwards claiming that groups like ISIS do not represent the true Islam because the number one victim of their barbaric terrorism is Muslims. You cannot dispute the fact that they are currently right about the number one victim status, but that is all. And it is also undisputed that dipstick is only partially hidden behind the sign of her own stupidity. Why partial? Because these individuals choose to remain stupid and an ongoing threat to Canada.

Muslims have no problem with their Allah demanded slaughter of each other. And, if they inadvertently kill one of their own faithful it is nothing more than collateral damage. In fact, it is rationalized as the will of Allah that they become such ‘martyrs’, with the killers themselves being chosen to assist onward those destined to enter Islam’s paradise. If they deliberately kill fellow Muslims legitimately intermixed with targeted kafir for such purposes as business they should make an atonement of ‘blood money’ to the relatives. But such payment must only be made if they have money no longer needed to fund their jihad. Muslims who are intentionally or accidentally killed are simply martyrs; and the obligatory jihad should never be abandoned because it creates martyrs.

Kinana b. al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu al-Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, “Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?” he said Yes. The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr b. al-Awwam, “Torture him until you extract what he has,” so he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud. (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, p. 515) :Following this brutal spectacle, Muhammad took Kinana’s seventeen-year-old wife, Safiyya bint Huyayy, as his own bride (because nothing says lovin’ like torturing and murdering a woman’s husband for money).” Watch the imbedded video posted by David Wood at 6:24

Stretching exercise jihadi style: Hadith Tabari 8:96: “A raiding party led by Zayd set out against Umm in Ramadan. Zyad tied her legs with rope and then tied her legs between two camels until they split her in two. During it, Umm suffered a cruel death. She was a very old woman. Then they dragged Umm’s daughter and Abdallah to the Messenger.”

This was an old lady, torn apart in excruciating pain just to rob her of a booty and take her children as slaves for sex and material profit for Muhamad. The Prophet raided and killed many innocent people in small villages even during Ramadan so he could plunder their homes and property. There was no one at war with him in the small towns of Mecca and Medina in his early days. Muslims try to pass such actions off as a past history simply done in former times of war. Such claim is garbage and such actions continue amid the Islamic jihadists till today. The truth cannot be denied and like their model they murder the innocent, take slaves and plunder civilian homes.

Bukhari 5:59:512: “Narrated By Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, “Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a nation to fight, then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.”

When the inhabitants of Khaibar came out on the early morning roads Muhammad had their warriors killed and their offspring and women taken captives. The Safiya mentioned in the David Wood’s report that was to become the property of Muhammad was among them.Court is closed. Islam espouses terrorism and all Muslims espousing Islam are espousing the practice of terrorism. Kick them out of Canada.

Criminal Harassment

Such actions can entail persistentlyfollowing, communicating, watching or threatening any person or anyone known to that person when the perpetrators knows or ought to know that the other person might reasonably fear for their safety or safety of anyone known to the victim. Criminal harassment laws prohibit the transmission, or repeated transmission of false information by any means, directly or indirectly, which is intended to injure or alarm any person or identifiable group.

Criminal harassment as a violation of Canadian law has developed around stalking issue, and by most persons it is more commonly known as simply stalking. It can be defined as repeated harassing behaviour carried out over a period of time such as repeatedly following, communicating with or watching someone in any aspect or location of their normal life behavior. Such stalking is usually associated with males being the perpetrators and females the victims of misguided sexual proclivities.

As targets the victims do reasonably fear for their safety but the activity does not necessarily result in physical injury. However, it has in many cases been the precursor to subsequent extremely violent and/or lethal acts.

Stalking behavior is not symbolic of love; it is about power and abuse. Thus, I have included this information given the increasing honor killing in Canada; and further, we face the necessity of dealing with matters surrounding the negative Islamic espousal of male-female relationships as documented in Sector Four: Female Oppression.

For persons living in such fear:

All information necessary to establish your best legal path for putting a halt to your stalker; and for successful prosecution of the perpetrator under criminal harassment law can be found on the following three web links.

Under the Code 264(1) No person shall, without lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engage in conduct that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them.

Under the Code (2.11.5) your arrest and charge(s) being levelled will likely result in all but the most exceptional circumstances.

Under the existing legislation whoever contravenes the Act is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to a. imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years; or b. an offence punishable on summary conviction.

“A strong and consistent response to criminal harassment requires that all allegations of criminal harassment be taken seriously.” Thus, it must be noted that false allegations of criminal harassment have severe penalties entailed as well.

Public Incitement of Hatredis the willful promotion of hatred against any identifiable group by anyone through communicating statements in a public place where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace if guilty. A “public place” includes any place to which the public have access as a right or by invitation, express or implied; and “statements” includes words spoken or written or recorded electronically or electromagnetically or otherwise, and gestures, signs or other visible representations.

Definitions

Innocent people can be easily killed when one exhorts individuals to violently advance or defend their faith as does the message of Islam in mosques and other points of assembly. The message of Islam instigates fear, paranoia and destruction through riots the longer it is allowed to spread within any non-Muslim nation. Islam is 100% guilty of Public Incitement of Hatred in Canada and many persons holding positions within government services and elected office are guilty of complicity in such crime.

Incite (incitement): To cause someone to act in an angry, harmful, or violent action or feeling when the actual victims of the incitement have done nothing directly to provoke the attackers. The legal definition of incite is simply given as to urge on.

Incitement may or may not always entail the initiating of the damaging event within the immediate timeframe the stirring up and urging on takes place. But incitement is the triggering mechanism that instigates the violent and socially destructive actions that eventually occur. Like the contractions of birth pangs that eventually induce a baby into existence so the message of Islam ultimately brings forth its evil results. It shall continue to do so unless given absolute and final sterilization. Not to do so will just allow its birth defects to carry onward. Islam is the instigator of the violence, not ISIS. ISIS is just the Devil’s doctor delivering the evil child.

This person and the motion M-103 which she tabled in our House of Commons on December 6, 2016 will be utilized as the core example to write around concerning Public Incitement of Hatred through Islam in Canada.

This bozo Muslim wench truly believes she is winning the approval of Allah through advancing sharia in Canada. At the time of this compilation she is known to many as our lady of emotion, a true Liberal defender of defenceless Muslims against the rampant Canadian attack of Islamophobia blaspheming her Islam.

The problem is that MP Iqra Khalid, who tabled M-103, clearly understands Islamophobia to mean what its original promoters, the 56 Muslim-majority block of the United Nations known as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), say it means. The OIC wants to see the Cairo Declaration on Human rights become the template for Islamophobia policies worldwide as does Iqra. The Cairo Declaration asserts the superiority of Islam and defines freedom of speech according to Sharia law, which considers any criticism of Muhammad and Islam blasphemy. All criticism of Islam is to be legally abolished.

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), comprised of the Heads of State of 56 Islamic Countries and the Palestinian Authority decreed in 1990 that “human rights” is to be interpreted within the context of Sharia Law. (See articles 24, 25)

This means that when Muslims, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, use the term “human rights” they mean Sharia and not human rights as defined by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And contrary to the Western definition of slander, blasphemy or slandering Islam includes making statements about Islam that are true. Thus, even direct quotes from the Qur’an that are deemed to be insulting to Islam in any context they choose to design or implement will suffice to see you prosecuted.

There have been and ongoing, four main ‘legislative’ attempts to get the OIC Cairo Declaration its foothold in Canada through ensconcing special status for Islam; and ultimately entailing legally establishing first the sharia blasphemy law and then sharia in total domination of the Canadian legal system. The four are:

1) Bill 59 in Quebec which failed to be passed into law, after considerable public debate.

2) Petition e-411 as initiated by Samir Majzoub, President of the Canadian Muslim Council and tabled December 5,2016 by Frank Bayliss, MP.

3) Motion M-103 as tabled by Iqra Khalid, MP December 5,2016.

4) NCCM Brief with respect to “Our Security, Our Rights, National Security Green Paper 2016” as presented to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and Security Dec 14,2016

We shall examine them all to the degree necessary, as sharia is what Iqra Khalid is trying to see implemented. And for her efforts overt and covert she will be ultimately be prosecuted along with many others complicit to her actions.

“Iqra graduated from York University in 2007, with a double major in Criminology and Professional Writing. She later obtained her Juris Doctor.”

As an educated ‘Professional Writer’ she will not be able to lay claim she did not know how to draft a proper, clearly stated, legible motion or petition. With a basic Criminology degree, she is well aware of the terminology and definitions I shall be elucidating in describing her conduct.

The touting of ‘she later obtained her Juris Doctor’ (J.D./JD), also known as the Doctor of Jurisprudence degree, sounds impressive and leaves the uninitiated with the belief she must be somewhat of an authority on our Canadian law. Like most Muslims she touts her credentials in such manner to give the impression of position or capability beyond their true standing. This is minor to some degree considering they can outright lie with the blessing of their Allah.

Whatever, while her Juris Doctor is a professional level Doctorate in Law she earned in the United States, such Juris Doctor accredited level of expertise is that accredited to the level of a Bachelors degree here in Canada. At the time of her ascendency to ‘political prominence’ she was working in some format or capacity of ‘a legal professional with the City of Mississauga’. She is in no manner what Canadians think of as a ‘lawyer’ or someone qualified to practice such level of law or defend them in the Courts of the Land.’ In fact, there are persons far more capable of defending your rights in Canadian legal jurisprudence than Iqra that have never had any formal legal training what-so-ever. Better give a listen to Bill Warner, PhD: The Self-Taught Scholar https://youtu.be/1GPXyBwmuxI

Whatever, there are 98 profiles on LinkedIn for variant persons named Iqra Khalid but our Iqra is not amid the top ten. She has made claim to special status so you would think she should be. As is stated elsewhere: “Khalid believes that she brings a unique perspective to her job, given her status as a both ‘a young, brown Muslim woman’ and a first-generation immigrant.” So, let us have our unique dual status ‘Mississauga Muslim Mouth in Motion’ first state her Private Member Business of disrupting the nation.

At this point note her use of e-petition e-411 and her motion m-103 as being of prime importance to Canada in dealing with terrorism and hate crime through treating ‘islamophobia’ as she is directing it be handled. E-411 and m-103 were a simultaneous presentation to Parliament December 5,2016 as joint instruments of manipulation and by the date of February 15, 2017 she is addressing the House in this manner: “I have been asked by some to change the wording of my motion to remove “Islamophobia” and other references. I will not do so any more than I would speak of the Holocaust and not mention that the overwhelming majority of victims were six million followers of the Jewish faith and that anti-Semitism was the root cause of the Holocaust.”

As you read along, take note of what she claims as common ideologies and ‘trigger events’ that spurred her onward along her path of action, or increased her awareness that she is right in all her views.

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear; (b) condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination and take note of House of Commons’ petition e-411 and the issues raised by it; and (c) request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study on how the government could (i) develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia, in Canada, while ensuring a community-centered focus with a holistic response through evidence-based policy-making, (ii) collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities, and that the Committee should present its findings and recommendations to the House no later than 240 calendar days from the adoption of this motion, provided that in its report, the Committee should make recommendations that the government may use to better reflect the enshrined rights and freedoms in the Constitution Acts, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues who have stood with me today.

Today I am honored to speak to my Motion No. 103. This is a motion that seeks to continue the important conversation about how we can strengthen our Canadian fabric by studying systemic racism and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia, in Canada.

I am a member of Parliament in one of the most diverse ridings in Canada. I like to say that the whole world is represented in my city of Mississauga. We live beside each other as Canadians. We all, in our different ways, contribute to the building of Canada. We all form part of this beautiful Canadian fabric. Our Prime Minister has often said that our diversity is our strength. Our government of today focuses its policies on being inclusive and on leveraging our strengths to the benefit of all of us as a nation.

However, when it comes to the ground reality, I often find myself wondering how it is that we can come from so many different places, be of every colour, practice different faiths, and yet collectively, be one of the most peaceful countries in the world. Balancing the interests of such a diverse and dynamic group of people like Canadians requires a lot of work. It requires partnerships between our policy-makers, civil society, which acts as a watchdog, grassroots organizations, which provide programs and services required, and individual Canadians and the respect they have for one another. Without that respect, our society cannot function. Let me be clear. This respect exists, despite Canadians having differences in ideology, skin colour, faith, and so on.

In light of the statistics, the media reports, and the personal stories I hear, I feel that this partnership needs more effort.

Motion No. 103 seeks three things from our government: first, to recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear; second, to condemn all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination, including Islamaphobia; and third, to request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study on how the government could develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination, including Islamaphobia, and collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct a needs assessment for impacted communities.

Racism is not new to Canada. From the struggle of black Canadian communities, to the turning away of the Komagata Maru from Canadian shores, to the internment of Japanese, Italian, and Ukrainian Canadians, to discrimination against our Jewish community, exemplified by the actions taken in 1939, when 907 Jewish refugees aboard the German transatlantic liner, the St. Louis, were seeking refuge from Nazi Germany. Canada refused to take them in, and the ship sailed back to Europe, where 254 would later die in concentration camps.

This brings us to the historic and ongoing struggle of our indigenous communities, and now, additionally, the targeting of the Muslim community in Canada.

Racism and religious discrimination is a reality. A recent survey commissioned by The Globe and Mail and conducted by Nanos Research in 2016 suggests that seven in 10 respondents say that there is still a lot of racism in Canada. One in five have had a racist remark directed at them, and more than one-third have made a racist remark in the company of others.

In 2016 alone, there were cases of discrimination and racism against almost every community in Canada. On September 20, 2016, the University of Alberta woke up to posters put around campus depicting turbaned men of the Sikh faith with racist insults written above them.

In December 2016, in Edmonton, a man went up to two women wearing hijabs. He then pulled a rope from his pocket, tied the rope into a noose, and said, “This is for you”.

In November of the same year, swastikas and racist slurs were spray-painted on a church in Ottawa that had a black pastor. “Go home” was spray-painted on the front doors of the Ottawa Muslim Association. Anti-Semitic slurs were spray-painted on synagogues.

Statistic Canada’s most recent hate crime data from 2014 shows a doubling of hate crimes perpetuated against Muslims over a three-year period. Many Muslim Canadians have told me personally that they do not feel safe practising their faith here in Canada.

When I tabled Motion No. 103, not even in my wildest imagination would I have envisioned the Quebec terrorist attack, where six Canadians lost their lives for the simple reason that they were practicing their faith.

When over 69,000 Canadians came together to call on our government to act on Islamophobia through e-petition 411, sponsored by the member for Pierrefonds—Dollard, it was a signal to me that we need to act.

The first step toward engaging in these conversations of inclusion is to recognize that we have a problem. Words have impact. When we as a government stand together and condemn intolerance manifested through racism and religious discrimination, we can begin to tackle the issue.

I have been asked by some to change the wording of my motion to remove “Islamophobia” and other references. I will not do so any more than I would speak of the Holocaust and not mention that the overwhelming majority of victims were six million followers of the Jewish faith and that anti-Semitism was the root cause of the Holocaust. We cannot address a problem if we fail to call it by its true name.

What is Islamophobia? The most commonly used definition, and the one I ascribe to, is that Islamophobia is the irrational hatred of Muslims that leads to discrimination. With that definition in mind, I find it hard to believe that any member of the House would vote against a motion that condemns this.

I cannot believe that some Canadians are practitioners of Islamophobia. There are certainly a small, and unfortunately growing, number of individuals who are driven by dark motivations to commit acts of violence or even murder to silence or marginalize Canadians who ascribe to certain beliefs and values.

I would like to address the question of freedom of speech, which is a central and dearly held Canadian value protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The passage of my motion will do nothing to affect the status of the charter, despite many allegations to the contrary. To suggest that my motion, the aim of which is to initiate a study of systemic racism and religious discrimination in Canada, could possibly impact the freedom of speech enjoyed by Canadians demonstrates a lack of understanding of how our charter works.

A study of systemic racism and religious discrimination would bolster the state of freedom of speech in Canada by making certain that all voices are able to be heard on a level playing field. In essence, this study would shed light on areas in which the freedom of speech of Canadians belonging to racial and religious minorities is currently curtailed. The freedom of speech of all Canadians is strengthened by studies such as the one proposed by the motion, because having access to the experiences and wisdom of all Canadians makes our society, culture, and economy stronger. To recognize where we currently have a blind spot, where we “other” certain Canadian voices, can only result in an enrichment of our multicultural, secular national conversation.

To tackle this issue, we must go to our partners, our civil society, our grassroots organizations, and individual Canadians to assess the impact of racism and religious discrimination on Canadians. I propose that these conversations take place in the context of a formal study that brings everyone to the table and provides them with an opportunity to raise their voice.

It is not about one race over another. It is not about one religion over another. Hate does not discriminate. I am sure the black community, the Jewish community, the aboriginal community, the Sikh community, and many more communities feel what their brothers and sisters of the Muslim faith feel today. The reality is that none of us are immune. None of our communities are exempt from this sort of prejudice, bigotry, racism, and discrimination. This motion is about strengthening our country. It is about finding ways to work together to build on our diversity as our strength.

I ask all members of the House to join with me and pass this motion so the committee can conduct a fulsome study of systemic racism, religious discrimination, and Islamophobia. I would expect the committee to call witnesses from all affected communities as well as hear from experts both in the field of evidence gathering and from those who can offer potential solutions through greater education and understanding.

This motion was never meant to be a divisive one, and I am indeed sorry that some have tried to turn the intent of the motion into something that it is not. The motion would not expand or change the Criminal Code in any way. The intention of the motion is to show all Canadians that Parliament is united in its opposition to all forms of discrimination that weaken our Canadian fabric.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned at the end of her speech that she would like to see Parliament come together. She had a chance to amend the motion in some very minor ways that would have allowed for perhaps near unanimous support in the House for her motion, but she chose not to do that.

Could the member tell us why she and/or the PMO have resisted an opportunity to bring Canadians together on this very important issue?

Mr. Speaker, the wording of the motion as it stands today is supported by members of the House from across party lines. The wording of the motion as it stands today is supported by organizations all across Canada. It is supported, as it stands today, by Canadians at large all across Canada. Watering down the language of the motion will not be in the best interest of Canadians.

I really would like to address the concerns raised by the member and his colleagues, and I would like to see the committee study these issues as presented.

The Reality of Iqra Khalid she presents is one that has branded herself an instigator, a fomenteor, purveyor of seditious ideology treasonous to Canada; and both inducer and inciter of others to such positioning through goading complicity. She will be dealt with accordingly, so read on.

Instigate (instigated): to goad or urge something forward, causing it to happen or begin.

Instigate is often used as a synonym of incite, for example as in ‘Black Lives Matter hoodlums instigating violence’ after having incited persons to turn up for what was supposed to be peaceful demonstrations. Still, the two words differ markedly in overall correct usage. Incite normally stresses an act of stirring something up that results in an event of damaging actions that the inciter may or may not have even been present to ignite. Both inciting and instigating are manipulative endeavors. But, to instigate is a more direct underhanded attempt at initiating or encouraging someone else’s action for purposes of their own damaging design. These purposes if achieved normally have a negative result for the victims of such manipulation.

Instigate first appeared in English in the mid-16th century, approximately 60 years after incite, and clearly implies a personal responsibility for the results of the provocations by the instigator.

To stir up through provocation (instigation) means to purposely call forth something as an action or feeling, by providing it with the needed stimulus to make certain it emerges, that it moves forward as the instigator desires. It is like the pricking of a stationary large scale weather balloon with a needle. If the balloon is partially deflated it will fly onward in some direction. But, if it is very strongly or over inflated it explodes.

The legal definition of provoke is to incite to, or provide the needed stimulus for anger. Thus, the instigator through their actions of provocation, no matter the time-stage of their actions is guilty of Public Incitement of Hatred as being discussed surrounding the proponents of Islam.

One can carry onward in their pathway of provocation by directing attention backward to the responses occasioned by their own initial actions, acting as if they were the spontaneous results of the people or events that have been manipulated. Instigators are such persons who imaginatively re-create past events to conjure up memories they know frustrated, irritated, excited and stirred up anger in the past.

The media is often made a ploy in creating such perception, but too often it is complicit in bringing about such beliefs. Complicity is easily discernable in the Islamic propaganda machine embedded within our Canadian media and political system. And, complicity in Public Incitement of Hatred is a punishable crime in Canada.

The degree of complicity by guilty parties is somewhat measurable, or at least definable in three basic stages.

1) Instigators will usually first lay claims to be trying to stimulate or quicken the of interest others in some pretended noble manner. Their quickening ploys are duplicitous, for quickening normally implies there are to be beneficial results for all they are directing their attentions toward.

To further their designs, they pique the targeted group in manners they claim as necessary to rouse them out of states of lethargy, quiescence, or indifference to an issue that is pertinent to their own well being or others they are responsible for. To pique suggests remarks that stimulate through mild irritation or challenges that supposedly jolt one to interest for their own good. In reality they normally conjure up erroneous emotional guilt feelings in the ‘jolted’, that they are somehow personally responsible for, or ongoing cause of the ‘problem’ if they do not assist the instigator.

2) Instigators employ Garnering Support methodology. At some point in their instigation these persons make use of the law in manners that suggest themselves as being obedient, law abiding citizens.

They will make personal appeals to incumbent authorities for support in private and ever increasingly more public venues. The tone of their messaging only gradually turns more adversarial as they invoke claims that political, spiritual or personal injustice is the cause of their hardening stance. The ideas of potential civil disobedience as being potential justifiable solution are now being advanced. Such attempts to make people feel a certain way or have a certain idea in their mind when you want it to explode are a part of the tactic of fear mongering.

Fear mongering works well for the instigator in manipulating politicians, special interest groups and the general public. But it is perhaps the manipulation of the general public that is used most effectively against the politicians. Ultimately it is the political system that must be altered to achieve the goals of instigators in the world of Islam. And this alteration through manipulation is best achieved through the media and through the use of petitions that make it appear there is a general support for the ‘issue at stake’.

You must pay close attention to the wording of any document, but in particular to that of petitions. The legal definition of a petition is a formal written request made to an official person, body or authority. Thus, one needs to pay heed to the wording, the party toward whom the petition is being directed, the special interest affiliations of the instigating petitioner(s) and the timing of the launch. In the majority of cases the number of signatories can not be a genuine basis for reaching a decision as to either support or rejection of such. The consideration of these factors will expose to large degree the Instigator and manipulator of Petitions to achieve their own designs.

3) Legal Re-definition

In the case of Islamic Instigators, by the time petitions and motions are being bandied about or becoming a part of their ‘issue’ they have essentially had to come out of the closet. They will still try to cloud the issue underway, alluding to the petitions themselves as somehow stipulating their authority to demand their right of legal enactment. A petition of its own accord has no legal jurisdiction what-so-ever. While, they can no longer hide their true designs, but will still try to do so claiming it as a noble and just matter of religious rights to freedom. But, when Muslim petitions and motions are before the Federal and Provincial Governments, rest assured they are embarking on serious overtures toward fomenting legal redefinitions of Constitutional Law as enshrinement of their sharia.

Foment (fomenting) means to spur to action, through persistence in goading a matter onward, trying to stir up public opinion to incite, encourage or instigate the cause of troublesome acts. If someone acts as a fomenter, they are fanning the flames of discord that can easily extend into violent opposition and make the ‘issue’ even worse. It is their persistence in goading that clearly identifies them as the Instigator or one complicit in actions that are perhaps at best, both actions of treason and sedition. If one’s actions foment a riot or rebellion to the laws of Canada they are clearly establishing their inherent guilt.

A fomenter is a person not easily influenced or worried by what other people think. They are confident and determined in facing their opposition, with a strong manipulative personality that never truly deals with ‘differences in opinion’ or compromise in any manner with their primal desires. At the core of their personality is an angry animosity, an inbred hostility that is kept well hidden until those they perceive as a potential threat are vanquished or victory seems eminent to them. At such times the mask often slips momentarily, such as the visible smirk on Iqra’s face looking over the shoulder of Heritage Minister Joly below. No one else in the little mob of miscreants looks happy except her.

When a fomenter is caught up short or thwarted in their designs, their resentment and animosity may enrage them to personal violence. If someone is violent, or if they do something which is violent, they normally use physical force or weapons to hurt, injure or kill other people. A violent event amid Muslims in general we know happens suddenly and with great force, whether it be by way of bombings or honor killings. But with a true fomenter of Islam they never take such actions themselves, they simply turn their fury toward manipulating someone else toward such goals.

If someone foments trouble they cause it to develop.Such is the case of Iqra Khalid on her fomenting pathway to sharia for Canada.

Sedition

In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. The term sedition in its modern meaning first appeared in the Elizabethan Era (c. 1590) as the “notion of inciting by words or writings disaffection towards the state or constituted authority”.

Typically, sedition is considered a subversive act through incitement of discontent or resistance to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not specifically aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition and through their overt actions are prosecutable under sedition laws.

You do not have to be a rabble rouser, active in the streets, to be guilty of sedition. If your conduct or speech incites people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch you are guilty of subversion. The legal definition of subversion is a systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system by persons working from within it; also, the crime of committing acts in furtherance of such an attempt.

The legal definition of sedition is the crime of creating a revolt, disturbance, or violence against lawful civil authority with the intent to cause its overthrow or destruction. The practical definition of such civil disorder is the crime of saying, writing, or doing something that encourages people to disobey their government.

Treason is the betrayal of trust. It is the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by assisting its enemies, attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.

“Treason is probably the oldest and most serious offence in political society, with the possible exception of murder. The earliest English treason legislation, which dates from 1351, is the basis of all treason legislation in the English-speaking world. Originally, treason meant an attack upon the person or life of the monarch, but as the state became more important than its sovereign, treason came to indicate any act directed at the overthrow of the government or against the security of the state.”

Treason and sedition are like two arms of faithlessness, treachery and disloyalty attached to a body under demented command to actions of betrayal. The violation of allegiance to one’s government is a treacherous act, and when occasioned by one from within the government it robs citizens of their faith and confidence in society as a whole.

The perfidy of politically harming someone who trusts you is an action of utmost moral disloyalty to the electoral body in general. The sexual abuse of a young person by a clergyman is usually regarded as the ultimate disloyalty, but I believe the disloyalty of political abuse is its equal.

Our nation appears fairly well prepared to deal with treasonous behaviour and activity through Section 46 of the Criminal Code of Canada which establishes offences of “high treason” and “treason.” Provisions for “high treason” involve matters of war and assassination, or attempted assassination. Within the provisions for simple “treason” there are included provisions for attempting to overthrow a federal or provincial government, as well as conspiring with a group or individual in the act of “high treason”. Respecting acts related to treason; it also sets out certain evidential rules and limitation periods for the prosecution of treason offences.

Under Section 46 of the Criminal Code, a person commits “high treason who a) kills, attempts to kill, wounds, imprisons, or restrains the sovereign, b) wages war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto, or c) assists an enemy at war with Canada or any armed force against whom Canadian forces are engaged in hostilities, even if no state of war exists. The punishment for high treason is life imprisonment, without parole eligibility for 25 years. A person commits “treason” who a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province, b) discloses, without lawful authority, military or scientific material to agents of a foreign state, if he or she knows or should know that the material may be used to impair Canada’s safety or defence, or c) engages in certain listed conspiracies or attempted offences. The punishment for treason is life imprisonment; normal parole rules apply. Canadian citizens and persons owing allegiance to Her Majesty in right of Canada who commit acts of high treason or treason are punishable under Canadian criminal law even if the acts were performed outside Canada.”

The Criminal Code also penalizes such acts as alarming the sovereign, assisting an alien enemy to leave Canada, failing to make reasonable efforts to prevent the commission of high treason, intimidating Parliament or a legislature, sabotage, incitement to mutiny and sedition.

Do we need a redefinition of treasonous behavior?

Convictions for treason in Canada have been very few. Since Louis Riel was hanged for treason on November 16, 1885, only one other Canadian citizen, Inouye Kanao, has been executed for the same crime. And, while there have been many cases that could be claimed as treasonous, such as the FLQ crisis and the Toronto 18 terrorist plot, none of the participants were charged under Canada’s legal definition of treason. Why not? Is the defining wrong or is the judicial system unwilling to consider actions that appear like treason, to be defined as treason and prosecuted as treason?

Obviously, the nation is being herded toward increasing magnitude of terrorist and immigration problems as being evidenced in Europe. Terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Abu-Sayyaf and the Muslim Brotherhood have long time back sank their roots into our soil. But it is the direct links of the Saudis and Iranians through our government, business and educational systems that are the most strongly ensconced.

The Muslim Brotherhood has been strongly advancing the cause of sharia wherever they manifest their presence through what is termed ‘political Islam’. This phrase is used to promote a sham of Islam that there is a ‘separation of Mosque and State’ similar to what we perceive as ‘separation of Church and State’ in our Western culture.

The term is deployed by moderate Muslims and others with claimed reference to being only the penetration of Islam into politics, public administration, policy-making and Islam’s ideology about unbelievers. They state that personal piety, belief and religious rituals for believers practiced in mosques or any place they choose to worship is a separate matter which is an absolute lie. There is no separation of Muslim anywhere on the face of the earth from the demands of sharia which all are commanded to see instituted.

But, the Muslim Brotherhood organizational strategy of employing this idea has worked well in Canada as elsewhere. They create a number of closely associated organizations that portray themselves as the ‘voice of the moderate Muslim or benign human rights groups’. They have done this in manners that have facilitated their entry into influential political, legal and security domains of Canada.

They have been highly active here through CAIR-CAN which they re-branded the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM). Aligned with them are the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC), the Muslim Students’ Association (MSA), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Canadian Muslim Forum (CMF), to name but a few.

You need to give some attention to James Bissett, the man following.

James Bissett is a former Canadian Ambassador with 36 years of service in eastern and central Europe, the Caribbean and Moscow, along with service as head of Canada’s immigration service. James Bissett argues that the unwillingness to call treason by its proper name, and the preference to use other, less serious sections of the Criminal Code when dealing with terrorists is an example of how deeply political correctness has permeated our society. He states “there is a dangerous tendency to obscure the truth and to camouflage unpleasant facts by ignoring them or by using euphemisms to minimize their gravity. “

And, he is correct as well in his statements that we are no longer in control of our own borders or immigration programs. The directional authority in these areas has been usurped by variant agencies of the United Nations.

And, of primary relevance is the matter of jurisdictional authority when it comes to dealing with charges of treason. As stated on April 23,2012: “Federal Justice Minister and Attorney General Rob Nicholson says the question of laying charges of treason against Omar Khadr is a provincial and police matter.” I pointed out such jurisdictional issues in Hate Crimes Canada – Round Twoposted on Oct 26,2016. The matter of needing to utilize correct jurisdiction does not somehow make prosecution for treason untenable.

Canada will rapidly have to face up to the treasonous behavior of many persons deemed to be ‘Canadian Citizens’ through taking them to account through our legal system; or soon face some of the worst carnage and blood flow in our streets that their treasonous-like activity is goading onward.

The time is now to take action, to prevent this type of behavioural pattern from spreading. Our existing laws need to be enforced, they should be made stronger and tougher to ensure our citizens are safer and more secure in their beds at night.

As things currently stand, it appears treason as a common occurrence and a crime actively will not decline until Justin Trudeau and his ilk have been prosecuted for sedition and/or treason. The damage done to Canada through the Trudeau lineage is highly visible with Pierre Trudeau having established close family ties with both the Aga Khan and Fidel Castro. The linkage of Justin Trudeau through the Muslim network and embracing of radical Islamic groups has been documented by many sources. Justin Trudeau is certainly a fit candidate to be prosecuted under Section 46 of the Criminal Code, so why is it not being done?

Who says its not being done? The process for enactment is being sorted out now.

Abet (abetting) is to encourage, support or assist someone through aid or approval to do something usually considered as wrong. In particular, to commit a crime, or offense of any sort that is a violation of Canadian law. In fact, it implies both assisting and encouraging, aiding in a tangible physical manner and abetting through moral or immoral encouragement toward a perceived goal. You hear it often used in the phrase aid and abet.

The legal definition is given as: to assist, encourage, instigate, or support with criminal intent in attempting or carrying out a crime. However, the person doing the abetting may or may not have good intentions with respect to their actions on behalf of the recipient. In other words, they could simply be aiding and abetting the recipient to ensure their destruction. This is not an uncommon ploy amid spiritually bereft people. Whatever, to abet something, especially something bad or undesirable, means to make it possible.

To what degree do you think Trudeau has assisted or supported Iqra in the achievement of her purposes? What do they have in common that makes him obviously more than just an innocent active seconder or encourager as her political leader? Are his matters as respecting islamophobia put forth by her evidence of his direct assistance or simply implied agreement? Is he an accessory before or after the fact of her presentation of the M-103 Islamic fiasco?

Accessory in law is someone who helps a criminal, especially by helping them hide from the police; or tries to conceal events that disclosure of would lead to their legal prosecution.

You can be an accessory before the actual physical manifestation of the crime if you have any knowledge of it what-so-ever and you do nothing to try to prevent it, or you actively engage in its promulgation through any means.

Or, you may become an accessory only after the fact of the crime, through helping the perpetrator in some manner, while you initially were never directly involved in the crime. But, in either case you are a criminal. Whether cleaver enough or not, to slip through a legal loophole or confused interpretations from some judiciary bench, you still remain a criminal and ultimately will be held accountable.

But, there will be no slipping out of this one for the criminals involved. Too much information, too much fact is public knowledge for escape no matter how much money is spent or political influence one may wield. Watch“A conspiracy fact”: Soros, Trudeau plot “refugee” scheme Rebel Media and follow the trail of money that pays to put the make up on the Public Face of Arrogant Islamic Stupid.

All four main ‘legislative’ attempts to get the OIC Cairo Declaration its foothold in Canada contain the strategy of employing Islamaphobia. Rest assured, Stupid and Crew will never see their sharia in total domination of the Canadian legal system.

Three Boots for Sharia – Get Out of Canada Islamophobia

The Politics of “Islamophobia”

The term “Islamophobia” was invented and promoted in the early 1990s by the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), a front group of the Muslim Brotherhood. Former IIIT member Abdur-Rahman Muhammad — who was with that organization when the word was formally created, and

who has since rejected IIIT’s ideology — now reveals the original intent behind the concept of Islamophobia: “This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliché conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.” In short, in its very origins, “Islamophobia” was a term designed as a weapon to advance a totalitarian cause by stigmatizing critics and silencing them. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=777

Did the Muslim Brotherhood invent the term “Islamophobia”?

According to the French philosopher Pascal Bruckner, “At the end of the 1970s, Iranian fundamentalists invented the term ‘Islamophobia’ formed in analogy to ‘xenophobia’. The aim of this word was to declare Islam inviolate. Whoever crosses this border is deemed a racist. This term, which is worthy of totalitarian propaganda, is deliberately unspecific about whether it refers to a religion, a belief system or its faithful adherents around the world.” Spencer on Islamaphobia > https://youtu.be/eL7v4RCp0KU

Before we move fully into dealing with our joint venture of e-411 and m-103 on December 5, 2016 we shall take a brief look at their predecessors eventually tabled in Quebec. E-411 came rolling out at us from this bulwark of Islamic infestation with the same Muslim Brotherhood elements crying Islamaphobia through provincial assault as they were federally. The cry of ‘us poor Muslims’ and necessity of special ‘Anti-Islamophobia’ measures did not in some mysterious manner have separate parentage. As we venture on remember this: Criminal Code legislation and Canadian Human Rights were not designed to, nor intended to protect any ideology from criticism. There is no single religious or ethnic group that has a right to or a need for greater protection under Canadian law than any other.

The wording of all the above documents simply is couched in language which pretends there is a need to extend special protections to other groups through making Islamaphobia a special matter. We will be doing a timeline of events around these two bills that you will see parallels to in the timeline of events that will be later used to exemplify e-411 and motion 103.

So, within Quebec we find the warning was astutely being given out by different sources that the intent of Quebec Bill 59 is consistent with the global agenda of the Organization of Islamic Co-operation.

“The intent of Bill 59 is ironically consistent with the global agenda of the Organization of Islamic Co-operation (OIC) pushed by Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and Islamist organizations worldwide. Since the late Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran pronounced his religious decree in February 1989 calling for the death of novelist Salman Rushdie as punishment for insulting the prophet of Islam, the push by the OIC at the UN to legally restrict and globally ban criticism of Islam as “defamation of religion” has intensified.”

“As a Muslim born and raised within the world of Islam, I experienced the debilitating effects of the closed society on people, and how their aspirations for freedom are daily crushed by a culture suspicious of and punishing any new thinking as subversion of religious-based customs.

Most Canadians and Westerners are unaware of instructions drilled into the impressionable minds of Muslim boys at a very early age in schools by mullahs or religious teachers. They are taught that idolatry or associating a partner with Allah (shirk), unbelief (kufr), and apostasy (ridda) are crimes against God deserving of death, and that it is obligatory on Muslims to execute this punishment. They are taught any rule of law apart from Shariah is sinful and illegitimate, and that it is obligatory on Muslims to establish Shariah rule wherever they can and persist in the effort until the whole world eventually submits.”

And, we have reports of what is pretty much standardized ‘Moderate Muslim Moans’ issuing forth.

“While the rest of Canada’s attention is focused on the federal election, an odious piece of legislation is making its way through Quebec’s National Assembly.

Moderate Muslims like Sun/Postmedia columnists Tarek Fatah and Farzana Hassan have warned Islamist groups in Quebec will use Bill 59 when it becomes law to intimidate and harass Muslims like themselves, who expose how some imams use the Qur’an to incite hatred and terrorism against the West. It could even be used, they say, to prosecute criticism of practices such as female circumcision and honour killings that most Muslims in the West oppose.”

Tarek Fateh’s warnings should still be heeded, as by March 3,2017 we find him holed up in India with a $15,000 bounty on his head for his views. Tarek Fatah Wanted Dead: https://youtu.be/zdwJEAU8zrE

Under call for death by All-India-Faisan-e-Medina, Tarek states that ‘Islamofacism’ is the source of the problem and its tool is Islamophobia. He has a highly vocal warning and call out for Trudeau and his elitist cronies within government, business and church; stating flatly that it is they who are the source for death to moderate Muslims like himself.

For certain the next headline about pandering to Islam is true for “it is Quebec Premier Couillard’s contention that Muslim terrorism is brought about by criticisms of Islam. From this follows the view if such criticisms are disallowed then terrorism will end. And Jacques Fremont, president of the QHRC, has been public in stating he would sue those who “write against … the Islamic religion … on a website or on a Facebook page.”

The former Brainless Surgeon Couillard entered politics in 2003, exited for a period then our Saudis sourced boy resurfaced short of cash in 2012 to head for the tax trough. The man is dumb, but not stupid, for he did his Muslim song and dance provincially in conjunction with Trudeau. Both attained clear cut majorities to foment Liberal lunacy upon the nation.

“In 2012, when asked why he wanted back in to the political scene, the doctor, who would soon emerge as the most deeply federalist of the Liberal contenders, explained in a kind of medical deadpan that he felt the “need to serve.” And serve both Trudeau and Muslim interests he has. New Quebec premier, Philippe Couillard, an intellectual and .

As to the Quebec Human Rights Commission and Jacques Fremont the man that would ‘sue anyone writing against the Islamic religion’; he got his reward for such intent by unanimous appointment as the President of the University of Ottawa at the end of June, 2016.

How do you categorize men such as these? Blind or nuts? I think blinded nuts is a good double Billing for the treacherous two.

But that is precisely what Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard has done by introducing Bill 59, which would quash criticism of just about any aspect or interpretation of Islam in that province. Not just Islam as a broad belief, but any Islamic practice.

For example, a moderate Muslim or anyone else expressing outrage about female genital mutilation could be subject to lawsuits from extremists whose sensibilities were offended by such a view.

Article 3 of the bill permits complaints to the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal about anything written on social media perceived as, “fear of the other”.

“Thankfully the bill cannot limit freedom of speech outside Quebec, as the internet is governed at the federal level.

We are not living in sharia-infested Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

Bill 59 reflects the creeping acceptance of Islamism.

It must not pass.

Ironically, it is defended by its supporters as an effort to fight religious extremism, on the assumption that when impressionable young Muslims hear criticism of Islam they become radicalized.

That is akin to suggesting the actions of bullies should never be challenged for fear they might become even more hostile to their victims.”

Part of what was being studied was that “Bill 59 also allows individuals to report anticipated hate speech before any expression has been made, and the Act permits the Commission to apply to court for an injunction to stop the speech from happening. This would permit the policing of future speech.” But with the squeak of a mouse the Pen was able to jubilantly announce on May 26, 2016 that Hate Speech Provisions Dropped from Quebec Bill 59 “Last week, Parti Québécois member Agnès Maltais demanded the withdrawal of Bill 59 because it would restrict freedom of expression. She said that lawyers, commentators and the majority of groups who testified in committee sessions were opposed on the grounds that the hate speech provisions were potentially repressive due to over-broad language.”

Blocked, but not beaten into submission, our Couillard-Fremont-Muslim induced crew simply changed course slightly. It was a ‘double date’ time of double deception, double confusion and double Billing strategy number 62. With the Quebec Multiculturalism Minister, Down in the Vallee, was now found the niqāb contender for ensuring the crowning of ‘Islamaphobia’ as the cause of all societal woes.

It certainly appears like Vallee and Khalid are a familiar Islamic ‘song and dance’ scenario.

Bill 62 became symbolic of the great ‘hide your identity-hide your intent issue’ of the time. “According to the bill, titled the “Act to foster adherence to state religious neutrality and, in particular, to provide a framework for religious accommodation requests in certain bodies,” officials could refuse an accommodation request for security or identification reasons.”

But, in transition times Liberal Bill 62 was supposed to have been even supportable by Conservatives of the ilk of Tory Tim Uppal “the former DJ turned MP and more recently appointed a Federal Minister – not too shabby for 39-year-old Tim Uppal from Edmonton. He has become the poster child for Canada’s touted multiculturalism.” But our Sikh poster boy went down to defeat through the 2015 election call through another visible minority taking him out. The pandering to visible minorities to garner votes is blatantly practiced in Canada. https://puttingcanadafirst.ca/site/tim-uppal-federal-minister-of-state-multiculturalism/ And the matter of the “identity smoke screen-ploy” for movement toward sharia has been dealt with elsewhere so onward we should go.

But, what is noteworthy is that in Quebec at this time it was claimed the two most controversial issues facing Liberals were being handled by Down in the Vallee. On the same day, she tabled the two bills that were to be a claimed panacea for political-social woes. She took a jab at one issue through Neutrality Bill 62 and a kick at the other when she also tabled Bill 59, aimed at fighting hate speech.

“She said Bill 59 would establish a new process to report any cases of hate speech or speech inciting violence to the Quebec Human Rights Commission. The proposed legislation would also give that tribunal new responsibilities and new investigative powers concerning hate speech, she said.”

And, these new powers were to be granted to Human Rights Commissions from sea to shining sea that could not even define what Islamaphobia was themselves. This was made evident during the ‘gotcha days’ and battles in Quebec.

While the necks were getting sore twisting back and forth between Federal-Provincial opinions the intentions of Quebec C-59 that tabled Provincially on June 10,2016 was already a sneaky Federal deal. Through a budget implementation Bill our notorious Bill C-59 was attempting to make major changes to Canadian privacy law.

Through the doorway of budget implementation, the Federal governments 158-page Bill C-59 had already received its first reading on May 7, 2015 and passed when assented to by the House of Commons on June 23, 2015. All of this took place about a year prior to Couillard and crew completing their antics through Down in the Vallee.

As Geist states: “A budget implementation bill is an unlikely – and many would say inappropriate – place to make major changes to Canadian privacy law. Yet Bill C-59, the government’s 158-page bill that is set to sweep through the House of Commons, does just that.”

But, the method seemed both a good and quite effective to the Trudeau-Couillard Muslim driven interest groups pushing it forward. They controlled the Committee that was struck to study the bill after its first reading.

Take heed now. “The omnibus budget bill touches on a wide range of issues, including copyright term extension and retroactive reforms to access to information laws. But there are also privacy amendments that have received little attention. In fact, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada was not even granted the opportunity to appear before the committee that “studied” the bill, meaning that privacy was not discussed nor analyzed (the committee devoted only two sessions to external witnesses for study, meaning most issues were glossed over).”

Now, it was the Harper Conservatives that tabled the Budget Bill sponsored by Joe Oliver as The Economic Action Plan 2015. This was the door through which Bill-C59 was entered and there was even a great deal of Liberal smoke screen posturing against it. But it was at the end of January 2015 that the Conservatives introduced Bill C-51 that caused the great furor of claims that Harper was trying to institute a police state. From here we ended up in Bill C-59. Bill C-51 for Dummies: What you should know

For certain Harper and crew got blindsided by Trudeau and the Muslim-Multicultural Brigade and it cost him the Government. Under Harper the Conservatives were never bedded down with Islamic interests as were the Liberals. But the Bill C-59 security concern elements were first placed before the Commons by someone? Trudeau was not smart enough to orchestrate such a manoeuver of his own accord, so who fits the Bill? Was it slippery Soros, the Aga Can-Can, the Wahhabis’ or perhaps interests out of the Iranian Hassan Khosrowshahi clan or our Canadian Chinese Muslim Association? Or, maybe Goodale was his chief advisor.

For certain it was Trudeau’s alignment with the Muslim economic-political power that took Harper out.

Whatever, there were only two general “security sector” elements under Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1 and we will take a look at them.

But first, another question, given that confusion can be a deliberate policy. Do you think it was confusing for people that we have/had both a Provincial and Federal Bill designated as C-59 nosing forth? Which was considered first? Was it the Provincial Chicken or was it the Federal Egg that apparently hatched first? By the look on the woman’s face below she certainly doesn’t know. From last reports, the old gal is still trying to figure out how Couillard so dramatically destroyed her provincial political chicken coup, eh? Oh well, she has a lot of government pension funds to smooth out her ruffled feathers and I do not believe she will end up behind bars where many of the others involved in this mess shall ultimately be.

Division 2 of Part 3 enactsthe Prevention of Terrorist Travel Act in order to establish a mechanism to protect information in respect of judicial proceedings in relation to decisions made by the designated minister under the Canadian Passport Order to prevent the commission of a terrorism offence or for the purposes of the national security of Canada or a foreign country or state. It also makes a related amendment to the Canada Evidence Act.

Division 10 of Part 3 amends the Parliament of Canada Act to establish an office to be called the Parliamentary Protective Service, which is to be responsible for all matters with respect to physical security throughout the parliamentary precinct and Parliament Hill and is to be under the responsibility of the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons. The Division provides that the Speakers of the two Houses of Parliament and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness must enter into an arrangement to have the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide physical security services throughout that precinct and Parliament Hill. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

Division 14 of Part 3 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to require the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada to disclose designated information to provincial securities regulators in certain circumstances.

Division 15 of Part 3 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to

(a) clarify and expand the application of certain provisions requiring the collection of biometric information so that those requirements apply not only to applications for a temporary resident visa, work permit or study permit but may also apply to other types of applications, claims and requests made under that Act that are specified in the regulations; and

(b) authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to administer that Act using electronic means, including by allowing the making of an automated decision and by requiring the making of an application, request or claim, the submitting of documents or the providing of information, using electronic means.

That is, it.

On the surface, there does not appear to be too much of concern in any of it, eh?

But think about D15, Part 3 and the broadness entailed in matters that ‘may also apply to other types of applications, claims and requests’ when placed in conjunction with Public Safety decisions ‘allowing the making of an automated decision’.

‘Public Safety and Immigration’ decisions cannot simply be left to an automated electronic process. It is not that we do not need to use modernized tools. It is about the fools we allow to structure the tools or those they hire to sharpen them. The matter of e-411 and motion m-103 has made it evident that true Canadians must bring their Government structure and people embedded into a position that is not harmful to themselves. How can you leave our Public Safety in the ‘automated hands’ of people who can not even pay themselves properly? Such people keep putting forth their ideas and efforts in a manner that show them incompetent or even deliberately negligent. The ‘Phoenix Payroll’ mess is one good example. Despite complaints, government intent on second rollout of new …

Chris Aylward, vice-president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada vehemently disagrees with all the excuses that are given. “They are full of s—,” said Aylward. “They have put so much pressure on the pay centre and Phoenix doesn’t work, plain and simple. Not only that, employees are told to say the problems are not because of problems with Phoenix.”

The government has the biggest and most convoluted pay system in Canada, with some 80,000 rules that take advisers years to master.

Debi Daviau, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, said pay has become a No. 1 concern of the union’s 60,000 members because “if you aren’t getting paid and can’t pay your mortgage, what else matters? The service focus of government has deteriorated so badly in the past few years that we hope this government will invest in service delivery and realize employees need to receive timely pay­, especially if you are talking about respecting employees,” she said.

What else matters Debi? Across the map of Canadian government pervades policies and intents of persons determined to destroy the very fabric of our democratic freedoms and all 60,000 people like you can do is moan when it impacts you personally.

You shall, perhaps too soon, find out what is truly worse due to the ‘powers’ slipped, or being slipped, under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (3). This is where we find the Public Safety Minister’s Power to Act. “The regulations may prescribe the circumstances in which the Minister may require a foreign national or another individual who, or an entity that, makes an application, request or claim, submits any document or provides information under this Act to do so using any means that are specified by the Minister.”

So, a bozo like Ralph Goodale apparently can specify the “any means” by which an immigrant, a refugee, a known or unknown terrorist can be documented or not documented in securing and establishing their ‘safe spot’ in Canada, eh?

RALPH is Not a Good Ale for Public Safety Canada To Be Drinking

If you want to see who this fellow is pointing his finger at go to Public Safety Canada – Home created in 2003. Check out the structure and ‘mandate’ of the Goodale ministry. Also, facts being posted through media show he does not cooperate to well with his ‘associate ministers’ and possesses none of the moral fortitude of his predecessor.

This Goodale man is a clear-cut case of the Fox being in charge of the henhouse for Ralph Goodale, is the only MP to serve under both Trudeau prime ministers… and he has worked hand-in-hand with some of the most corrupt Liberal politicians this nation has born. It is very understandable why Jihadi Justin Jumped to get Goodale back into political office and running damage control. As a former Finance Minister, he knew a lot of ‘associated data’ floating around over the past thirty years needing control.

His ranking in affairs and Trudeau’s rank political needs are obvious. On November 4, 2015 Saskatchewan MP Ralph Goodale is sworn in as minister of Public Safety … immediately after Trudeau is sworn in. Two of the many things Trudeau needed were 1) ‘control of data’ that could directly link Liberals from the times of his father onward to the full extent of their corruption; and 2) means of quickly implementing the flood of Syrian refugees his Muslim cohorts wanted into the nation.

Goodale quickly took aim at ‘data control’ through targeting CSIS and problematic to the RCMP. But he was at first kept busy with our Syrian flood fiasco.

The ‘flood’ would initially be the most disruptive and foment societal unrest so it had priority. Amid his ship of fools Trudeau had only two persons that could fit his designs. Both were long term Liberals familiar to Canada, and as “Eddie Goldenberg, a senior adviser to former prime minister Jean Chrétien, said it’s not a coincidence that Mr. McCallum and Mr. Goodale are handling the Syrian refugees.”

John McCallum was a former RBC chief economist who had served as cabinet minister under both Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin. He was used to provide a façade that there was economic experience and political expertise in the matters of the Syrians. And, Ralph Goodale was of one ‘dad’s good old boys’. Goodale was Trudeau’s only MP in Saskatchewan and had long tried to project himself as a ‘champion of the people’; coupled Goodale’s past experience as a minister of agriculture, natural resources, public works and finance he was/is Trudeau’s #1 ‘hatchet man’.

Associated data?

To control potentially problematic associated data collected by CSIS, Goodale needed to remove the ability from our ‘spy agency’ to store and retrieve such information with the exception being for pertinent ongoing cases such as those related to terrorism matters. In addition, he could not simply leave the access, monitoring and watch-dogging of CSIS and the RCMP to ‘simply committees and simple parliamentary oversight’.

“A bill to establish a long-promised parliamentary committee to review Canada’s national security agencies will make it a criminal offence for MPs to blab what they learn, says Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale.

It is already an offence under the Security of Information Act for government officials to disclose security and intelligence information and for any person to make unauthorized disclosures, but Goodale suggested there will be additional precautions taken in the act.

The proposed law Goodale will introduce Thursday in Parliament will fulfill a Liberal promise to give elected MPs the ability to oversee the activities of agencies like the RCMP, the spy agency CSIS, the electronic signals intelligence agency CSE, and border guards at the CBSA.

Goodale said the broad objective is to have a committee of parliamentarians which would have “extraordinary authority to examine all of the security and intelligence operations of the government of Canada.”

Selected MPs from all parties will have a two-prong job. They will have access to classified information, he said, so that they can “reassure other parliamentarians and Canadians generally that …our security and intelligence agencies are doing what they need to do to keep Canadians safe, and two, that they are safeguarding the values and the rights and freedoms of Canadians.”

Other promised, but unspecified, changes to Canada’s controversial national security law, C51, the 2015 amendments to the Anti-Terrorism Act, passed last year by the Conservative government, will have to wait.

The Liberal government, which has been conducting informal consultations for several months, will launch a formal consultation on C51 amendments through the summer and doesn’t expect that will conclude work until late fall, meaning no amendments are likely to be proposed until 2017.”

Read the entirety at your leisure, conscious of the results we are seeing now in 2017 from e-411 and m-103. Know this, a lot of what comes out of Goodale sounds like the ‘fancy dressed up word inversions’ of a potential anarchist. Why, because yesterday March 6,2017 was posted “Federal government plans to reject amendments that would give more powers to its proposed security committee…” http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/c-22-civilian-oversight-security-1.4011276

“The federal government’s rejection of key amendments to legislation that would create a new national security oversight committee will prevent future committee members from doing their job, the opposition argues.

Bill C-22, “An Act to establish the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians and to make consequential amendments to certain Acts,” comes up for debate this week.

The government has already given notice it will reject opposition amendments that would have given the new committee powers to subpoena information and to stay on top of ongoing police investigations, and to make it more difficult for ministers to refuse to turn over information.”

So, what made Ralph the Finger Pointing Blabber, suddenly not want to have ‘a committee of parliamentarians which would have “extraordinary authority to examine all of the security and intelligence operations of the government of Canada.”

Why does he no longer want his envisioned committee “to have access to classified information, he said, so that they can “reassure other parliamentarians and Canadians generally that …our security and intelligence agencies are doing what they need to do to keep Canadians safe, and two, that they are safeguarding the values and the rights and freedoms of Canadians.”

Why? Because Ralph is starting to panic a bit, for the Jargon of Jihad Justin and crew is truly blowing up in their faces through the suicide bomb they helped package called Islamophobia. Trudeau’s Liberals are the ones fomenting the dissentions, protests and many of our current governmental disruptions.

Goodale has not been a positive support for improvement of the RCMP or reinforcement of their ability to secure the nation. He has been to quick to criticize like stating on October 26,2016 that “harassment at RCMP is a ‘deep-seated’ problem, says Ralph Goodale”. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-harassment-goodale-1.3822863

“With the RCMP soon to face another class-action harassment lawsuit, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said it’s clear the RCMP has work to do on developing a healthy, respectful workplace.

“This is obviously a deep-seated problem and one that the government of Canada is absolutely determined to end,” Goodale said today outside the House of Commons.

Goodale also said the prime minister took the “rather extraordinary step” of asking him to ensure the RCMP is free from harassment. “And I have been pursuing this aggressively from the very early days of my time as minister,” he said.

And, aggressive toward the RCMP he certainly has proven. Casting aspersions whenever possible that there has to be a better way of running the organization, we see the inaugural report of Ralph’s attempt to install ‘civilian authority’ over our national police force submitted in June, 2016. Annual Report – Crcc-Ccetp.Gc.Ca Not satisfied with the ability to have ‘his appointed eyeballs’ ensconced we see on January 30, 2017 Goodale now pushing for splitting the RCMP into 2 divisions and managing them separately. Ralph Goodale says civilian oversight for RCMP should be examined…But, this public thrust came some ten days after Paulson had sent a blistering ‘in-house’ memo to Ralph, criticising his actions, that would not become public knowledge until February 27,2017 as shown below.

From abusing horses to abusing women the pressure was kept up on Commissioner Paulson and his crew. The relationship was acrimonious to say the least and the RCMP were hindered in their ability to do their work due to Goodale’s attacks and deliberate neglect of other areas of his mandate. On Feb 27, 2017 it was found out RCMP commissioner warns continued IT failures will have “catastrophic” consequences for police and the public …“Canada’s top cop is warning that ongoing computer network failures and slipshod service from Shared Services Canada could have “catastrophic” consequences for police and the public.

CBC News has obtained a blistering Jan. 20, 2017, memo to Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale in which Commissioner Bob Paulson details how critical IT failures have increased by 129 per cent since the beleaguered department took over tech support for the entire government five years ago.

Not only that, the memo says, the duration of each outage has increased by 98 per cent.

“Its ‘one size fits all’ IT shared services model has negatively impacted police operations, public and officer safety and the integrity of the criminal justice system,” reads the memo.”

Goodale’s attitude and aggressive pursuit toward the RCMP was to such a degree that the RCMP Commissioner only found out that there was to be an on the ground inspection of the ‘refugee border issues’ by Goodale on March 4/2017 through reading it in the press. This pretty much sums up the state of affairs between Goodale and our primary investigative-enforcement branch of Canadian law. And, as we know Commissioner Paulson has tendered his resignation for the end of June ‘so he can concentrate on his personal family’. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-commissioner-paulson-retirement-1.4011332

Confidence in the RCMP has been undermined and social unrest has been fomented through the mismanaged functions of the Ministry of Public Safety. It’s enough to make even a Saskatchewan wino ralph his guts up in the heat of the summer sun while shooting at gophers, eh?

But, we must also remember that Ralph’s ‘associated data fingers’ were poking in all directions.

A candid opinion is defined as onefree from reservation, disguise, or subterfuge; and straightforward as given from a candid, honest and impartial mind. I question the ability of the Bench to have functioned from such a mindset in the circumstances surrounding CSIS and manipulations taking place of opinion through both media and government. But, the positioning of Goodale as himself being a candid critic, ‘one who isfrank, outspoken open and sincere’ is absolute hypocrisy.

As well, we read “In his judgement, Justice Noel did not dispute the potential value of “associated data” to the important work CSIS does in this challenging world, but he could not find existing legislative authority permitting its retention and use.”

So perhaps he should have searched further and set a ‘new precedent’ given that ‘associated data’ is of extreme importance to the work CSIS does. Why do you think Goodale was allowed to achieve his own ends through this ruling, eh?

Remember, it was our Roaming Ralph declaring that he will correct the national security problems. For he, Ralph Goodale, your Public Safety Minister, Says he is making C-51 A Top Priority The bombastic horse’s ass states his portfolio is “of huge importance to Canadians. He says it is the equivalent of Homeland Security in the United States. He says the first thing on his plate is C-51, which gives expanded powers to police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. He must tackle the reversal of some of the more contentious anti-terrorism provisions contained in the law, and oversee a promise from the Liberals to have more parliamentary oversight of Canada’s national security agencies.”

From such a strong conviction and determined stance why would he welcome a report from the man who he has castigated and his associate agency CSIS, that had failed in its duty to be candid with the court.” From Ottawa, February 28, 2017 – Today, the Honourable Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, made the following statement on the release of theCanadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Public Report for 2014-2016.

“I welcome the release of the 23rd CSIS Public Report, which provides key trends affecting our country’s national security. Terrorism and violent extremism remained the most immediate threat to Canada’s national security during the period covered by this report. Interested Canadians will find engaging insight into the Service’s work to keep us all safe while protecting our rights.

CSIS uses a suite of investigative techniques that include, among others, open source research physical surveillance, interviews, and analyzing intelligence from a variety of sources. The Service works very closely with other government departments and agencies, police forces across Canada, as well as international partners and continuously assesses their operations in response to the current threat environment.

CSIS and I, as Minister of Public Safety Canada, are committed to inform parliamentarians and members of the public on programs and on issues important to the national security of this country.”

Well, for certain we know amidst its suite of investigative techniques with ‘associated data’ curbed Ralph appears to be breathing easier. But, I do not think CSIS is unable to legally stir up the dust of all ‘associated data’. We shall eventually see if this is truly the case. We shall also see to what degree our Ralph has simply been trying to don his personal dust proof mask. Let us bid him adieu momentarily as he rides off singing his once favorite song, blindly intent on creating his version of ‘I will rectify the disaster of the Canadian beef industry. The Cattle Call ~ LeAnn Rimes and Eddy Arnold ~ Lyrics and a Cowgirl Video

And even stronger opinions in the Quebec legislature such as posted August 18, 2015 Quebec’s Proposed Bill 59 | ACT! for Canadawhere stated “For the past couple of days, a Quebec law professor and former director of a George Soros funded ‘progressive-leftist’ group called Open Society Foundations, has been arguing in the Quebec legislature, that criticism of Islam should not just be illegal but punishable by massive fines for a first offense and life destroying ones for a second.”

Death for criticism of Islam is clearly now planted on the stage and the proponents of Bill 59, Bill 62 and workers in the cause of banning Islamophobia do not even know what comprises a hate crime or how to define such. August 21, 2015 exemplified this in Bill 59 and the hate speech dilemma in Quebec | Montreal Gazette You need to read the full analysis of what was underway at such time for Cara Faith Zwibel, a lawyer from the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, was asked whether two statements would constitute hate speech. Her response was “it isn’t clear: A reasonable person could see both as statements inciting hatred — or not.” As it turns out, both were statements made by Premier Philippe Couillard, ostensibly Bill 59’s biggest supporter and ultimately one responsible for putting ‘death for criticism of Islam’ on the Canadian stage erected in Quebec.

Now, go to August 24, 2015 where Real women give a realistic Analysis of Quebec Bill 59 Anti-Hate-Speech Legislationbeing proposed. “Quebec’s Bill 59 purpose purportedly is to combat hate speech and speech inciting violence. There are some very serious flaws in this proposed legislation. The flaw which is the most obvious is that “hate” and “speech inciting violence” are not defined in the bill. Consequently, its interpretation will depend on the personal views of the members of the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal who will make this decision.

The absence of such a definition was likely designed to give more latitude to the Commission, but it certainly creates a serious problem for anyone living in Quebec as there is no way of predicting how their words will be subsequently interpreted or defined.

Under Section 319 of the Criminal Code the incitement to hatred is already prohibited. Why then was it necessary to bring in Bill 59 in Quebec when the Criminal Code already makes provision for this?

In summary, Quebec’s Bill 59 is an alarming bill which places one’s utterances at risk, depending the ideology of a handful of appointed individuals on the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal. It will unquestionably have a severe chilling effect on public discourse in Quebec.

The bill has not been well thought out, as there appears to be no discernment of the bill’s long range implications. The bill seems to be more of an emotional reaction, not a rational one, to the current problems in Quebec society.”

And, whether you like to hear it or not: Canada has been manoeuvered to emotional reactions surrounding the beast called Islamophobia and Muslim issues in general, for it has not reacted in rational manners.

There were petitions against it like Stop Quebec Bill 59 – Change.org stating “FREE SPEECH must be defended. This bill 59 will kill your right to free speech and at the same time enforce Sharia Law in Canada.”

There were new organizations launched early in 2015 like the Mozuud Freedom Foundation Bill 59 – Mozuud where people were petitioning in opposition to the proposed law changes.

And there were FREQUENT WARNINGS about employment of Human Rights Regulations.

The title of the billQuebec’s Bill 59 itself was changed during the committee process. It went from “An Act to enact the Act to prevent and combat hate speech and speech inciting violence and to amend various legislative provisions to better protect individuals.” to “An Act to amend various legislative provisions to better protect persons.”

But, playing a ‘name game’ did not lessen public concerns being expressed. Quebec’s Bill 59: A Hate Speech Bill “should cause concern and attention for Quebec residents and secularists from coast-to-coast-to-coast. Human Rights actions in one province often set precedents for other jurisdictions.”

If passed, the 17-page document would have amended no fewer than 8 existing legislative tools.

Plaquing people was that “hate speech” is not defined in the bill; it is left to the interpretation of the Commission. Is criticism of multiculturalism considered to be “hate speech”? Is criticism of Islam “hate speech”? It will be up to the non-elected people of the Commission to decide where to draw the line of what can and what cannot be said in Quebec.”

Do you not think people should express such concerns about Human Rights Commission appointees when they watch their government advancing the designs of Muslim interest groups?

“Given that a bill is necessary, and I’m sorry it is, on the question of protection against heinous language, most important for me is that Quebec sticks to accepted international law,” she said. “The wording in the bill does this.”

“Leahy, who served as a career Canadian diplomat, including as Canadian Ambassador to the Holy See, said there is pressure coming from some Muslims in Quebec to have Bill 59 include “protection for Islam” and to “enshrine the concept” against defamation of religion.”

Pressure from inside Quebec? Is this the best analysis our genius could ascribe while she was quickly willing to endorse the pressure for the same things coming through a guise of “International Law”. Laws generated through the same United Nations that is bent on seeing the (OIC) Organization of Islamic Cooperation declaration ensconced.

Further, on the International Stage the harm in Quebec’s hate speech bill was drawing the attention of persons like Léonid Sirota. He teaches constitutional law at the AUT Law School in Auckland, New Zealand.

“Bill 59’s hate speech provisions are a restriction to freedom of expression, the scope of which is unprecedented in the history of Canadian hate speech laws. Québec may or may not be a “distinct society,” but this is not the sort of distinction to which its legislators should aspire. They should recall that while there is, as prof. Waldron says, harm in hate speech, there is also harm in overbroad hate speech laws that chill political debate. They ought to substantially amend or, better yet, to reject this bill.”

Québec’s authorities, it is worth noting, have a particularly sad record of prosecuting people for controversial or, sometimes, simply asinine speech. So, while the drafters of Bill 59 might not expect it to be employed in prosecuting people for attacking the sort of extremists whom they themselves have set out to combat, these expectations could easily be disappointed.”

With the reference to asinine speech coming out of Quebec we now listen to ‘Slick Sick Samer Majzoub’ stating these two Quebec Bills Are Apparently Targeting Muslims This is our Muslim Brotherhood Samer that was going to initiate petition e-411 and plant it at the time most effective to his ends.

He states, “Although, officials try to deny that they are targeting any group or religion, the way both bills are presented, debated and covered in the media leaves no doubt in the minds and hearts of many Muslim Quebecers that here they are, again, being used as a political football within the province’s political arena.” What he fails to state is that he is one of the biggest punters on the field which is exemplified when dealing with his petition e-411.

Further, he states “Moreover, concerns of extreme speech that may incite violence came as an additional reason for the need to have clear anti-hate speech laws. Such a measure would fight all sorts of discriminatory discourse, such as Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and racial talk. It’s hoped that such an act, if it’s fairly implemented, will heal division, reunite and create harmony within Quebec’s social fabric.” His talk is cheap and abundant surrounding extreme speech that may incite violence when his intent was to incite violence through centering out Islamaphobia in the manner he did. He already knew that it was an issue creating violent reactions when he determinedly moved forward to ensure it continued in such course. You see, the final outcome of what was assented to Federally via Bill 59 supposedly came into effect June 8, 2016 and ‘Slick Samer’ had petition e-411 opened for signatures: June 8, 2016, at 5:45 p.m. to thrust Islamaphobia further into the federal scene and provide a supposedly moral reason for m-103.

Before I deal fully with Samer and Company you need a brief hop forward for the direct results of their actions as displayed March 4, 2017.

Incitement to hatred? Incitement to hate crimes? Here is just some of a one day example of what Liberals and Muslims initiated through their activities in Quebec and furthered onward with their petition e-411 and motion m-103.

While there is a lot of ‘propaganda’ at play in some of the reports, the stating of who is in actuality deploying ‘fascist methodology’ is self-evident. It is those supposedly standing against the evil of Islamophobia that have their faces covered and doing the kicking.

Any sane person would unemotionally conclude the Liberal Elements examined thus far are guilty of Public Incitement to Hatred.

Behind it all is the same ‘Death to the West and Death to Israel’ seen when looking into the face of Sayyid Abu’l-A’la Mawdudi, founder of Jamaat-e-Islami. “His Pakistani Islamist political party, argued that any Islamic polity has to accept the supremacy of Sharia over all aspects of political and religious life in order to establish a truly Islamic government. His analysis associates jihad with anti-colonialism and “national liberation movements” and paved the way for Arab resistance to Zionism and Israel to be considered jihad.”

Islamofascism is a real threat to our culture and way of life. You need to take another look at your Muslim MP’s and Senators. Consider closely our Zero Hero Iqra with her ties to the Pakistani High Commission and links with the Pakistani Military Intelligence (ISI). And, remember that our Wahhabi Loving Trudeau is complicit with her in what appears clear cut sedition and treason.

We can now take another ‘time lined look’ at the matters of e-petitioning and Islamaphobia.

The E- Petition (e-411/Islam) is supposed to improve our democratic system through “digital democracy”. A motion to install the digital process passed into effect in January 2014 through the efforts of British Columbia NDP MP Kennedy Stewart. The parliamentary on-line petition became a digital reality when the process actuated online Friday December 4, 2015. Previously, only paper petitions were accepted.

The new system is supposed to make it easier for people with special interests to be able to effect federal government policy. Under the new system, e-petitions that garner at least 500 signatures and are sponsored by an MP can be tabled in Parliament. That would require the government to provide a written response, posted online, within 45 days.

Prejudice is considered an unreasonable, irrational dislike and distrust of people who are different from you in some way, especially because of their race, sex or religion.

However, among different people we find prejudices against women, black people, other races, poor people, rich people, people with learning difficulties, thin people, fat people and those in between, brands of merchandise, breeds of animals, young people, old people, occupations; and, some times even prejudices against car salesmen, lawyers and politicians. The list is endless and the attitudes of the prejudiced person are displayed to the degree that they have become lodged as deep-seated prejudice.

Prejudice is mainly an attitude, whereas it has results that we know as actions of discrimination. The simple definition given for discrimination is the practice of treating one person, or group of people differently from another in an unfair way. And, this treatment is considered to have negative results for the victim(s).

In the best interests of Canada, you choose from the alphabetical order, which of the following purported prejudices or manifesting acts of discrimination deserves to be given a higher priority?

Ageism is claimed as unfair treatment of people because they are old or young.

Bigotry is claimed a completely unreasonable hatred for people of a different race or religion based on strong and fixed opinions

Homophobia is claimed a prejudice towards or hatred of gay people.

Intolerance is claimed an unreasonable refusal to accept beliefs, customs, and ways of thinking that are different from your own.

Islamophobia is claimed to be a hatred and fear of Muslims.

Racism is claimed as bad, unfair treatment of people because they belong to a different race.

Sexism is claimed as the unreasonable belief that one’s own sex or sexual identity is in some manner superior to all others.

Xenophobia is claimed to be the unnatural distrust, hatred and fear of strangers and foreigners.

Choice?

What brand of fool makes the claim that ascribing a special position, status or legal interpretation surrounding the word ‘Islamaphobia’ is the trigger event necessary to garner the panacea for solving our social morass of all perceptible prejudice and discrimination? Well, I guess we are talking about that fool’s brand now, eh? And, on the Canadian Cultural Cow such individuals are trying to lead to the slaughter, is raising high a red hot prejudiced branding iron lettered M-S: Muslim Sharia.

To prejudice the outcome of events is to exert influence in some negative manner that it results in individuals or groups coming to an ‘unfair opinion’ about someone, something, some idea or some event. Perpetrators of prejudicial outcomes are usually quite intelligent, but dangerous in how they apply it.

Dangerous persons will normally be found emerging from very strong deep-seated prejudices and these people prove very difficult to change. But, when an individual or group reaches a state of ‘blind prejudice’ they enter a realm whereby their prejudice robs them of any genuine ability to consider facts, the truth about their condition and the path that got them into their ugly state of being. Islam raises its followers to reside permanently in its state of ‘blind prejudice’.

With or without prejudice? if a legal case is settled with prejudice, it will not be possible to open the case again. If it is settled without prejudice, it will be possible to bring the case to court at a later date. The legal case(s) to be brought against individual Muslims and Islam as a theocratic system will only be settled with prejudice.

But, right now we have to settle the matter of “petitions”. So, I am going to remind you of things you need to know about e-411 petition and the issue it addresses:

1) There is nothing in the existing Criminal Code provisions, specifically sections 318 (hate propaganda), 319 (public incitement to hatred), 430.4.1 (mischief relating to religious property) that refers to these as having anything to do with the term Islamaphobia, or what people construe as Islamaphobia or state as being caused by Islamaphobia.

Moreover, section 718.2 also authorizes judges to consider whether any crime was motivated by hate of the victim’s race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation or any other similar factors, to enhance sentencing upon conviction. Again, we see no referencing to the term Islamophobia or need for any need of definitional context of what person’s construe as Islamophobia to proceed with prosecutions and sentencing necessary due to actions that some would like to infer occasioned because of Islamophobia. 2. As to Islamophobia supposedly being the cause of discrimination and prejudice we see the same poppy-cock nebulous definitional designs touted as necessary. The simple fact is that Criminal Code and the federal and various provincial human rights legislation already address all forms of prejudice and discrimination, including any that may fall under the supposed cause of Islamophobia. 2. A petition imposes no obligation on the government what-so-ever, except for a published response within 45 days if it has passed through the right hoops in righteous manner. Petitions to the Parliament have no force of law and therefore do not bind the legislature or even the sponsoring Member of Parliament. Here is a guide on the topic and a visual graph of the steps that the petition will go through before being presented in the House of Commons.

But, read the Disclaimer regarding e-petitions: “There is no obligation on the part of any Member of Parliament to sponsor an e-petition. Neither the House of Commons nor any Member of Parliament sponsoring a petition endorses the views or information contained in any e-petition posted on this website. Moreover, they do not make any representations about, or assume any liability for, any of the information set out in any e-petition. No e-petition posted on this website is protected by parliamentary privilege until presented by a Member of Parliament to the House of Commons.”

So, why a petition if it seemingly has only a symbolic value?

Petitions are supposedly a tool used by Parliamentarians to gauge what issues are important to the public, a reflection of the will of the people. But, petitions are mainly used to try to influence legislators to take further steps aiding the petitioners; or to get them to introduce legislation consistent with the request of the petitioners. Our e-411 is such an attempt through creating a ‘boogey man’ called Islamaphobia. There is nothing lacking in ability to solve Canadian problems if the Islamic-Islamophobia sham is simply booted back into the pit of deception and lies that birthed it.

What currently is lacking is the chronic under-reporting of Islamic crimes, poor tracking of individuals already designated Islamic criminals and follow through in terms of prosecutions and enforcement of our existing laws.

The petition e-411 opened for signatures: June 8, 2016, at 5:45 p.m. (EDT) and was initiated by Samer Majzoub while President of the Canadian Muslim Council/Forum from Pierrefonds, Quebec. The petition, condemning “all forms of Islamophobia” is essentially the second attempt in Canada to put in place a form of Sharia blasphemy law, as drafted by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) for this purpose.

The e-process was started Dec 4, 2015, signatures commenced June 8, 2016 and we know that by February 15th, 2017 Iqra was giving her big blab that I asked you pay attention to. (Systemic Racism and Religious Discrimination – Private Members’ Business)

This ‘Bad Boy’ of Islam is also known as Samer Al-Majthoub, and he and membership of the Muslim Canadian Forum are directly linked to the radical Muslim Brotherhood and international Terrorist groups. “In 2012, Point de Bascule dedicated a portion of a profile of the Canadian Muslim Forum (CMF) to its president Samer Majzoub. Canadian Muslim Forum is one of many organizations set up by the Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure in Canada. It is mostly active in Montreal. As GMBDW pointed out in the past: “One of the most ubiquitous tactics of the Global Muslim Brotherhood is the establishment of a dizzying number of organizations and initiatives which create the impression of broad based support when, in reality, the sponsors are the same individuals and groups whose leaders have not changed in many years.”

“Samer Majzoub’s own track record and more generally the Muslim Association of Canada’s track record of endorsing Islamist radicals, such as Hamas, Ekrima Sabri, Salah Soltan, Hassan al-Banna, Yvonne Ridley, and many others help better understand where their concept of “moderate Islam” leads to.”

Samar was a well-known figure on December 13, 2014 when Iqra Khalid was suddenly nominated to run for office as an MP. She had only joined the liberal party approximately seven months before nomination. But, she was surrounded in controversy from the start for Shafqat Ali, a leading candidate and long time Liberal Party member in the Mississauga area, suddenly resigned to come out in support of her at an Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) hosted event.

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) had its ‘Development Fund’ charitable status revoked for funding terrorism in 2013. The ultimate recipient of the money was the Jamaat-e-Islami, which is seen as the south Asian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. Iqra’s father Hafiz Khalid was a long-time associate of the ISNA and formerly a vocal supporter of Jamaat-e-Islami. The entire structure of ISNA and the group surrounding Iqra was one riddled with Islamic extremist ideology, corruption and extensive fraud such as that inside the ISNA whereby money for the poor was squandered .

Samar and Iqra were well known to each other and she simply was selected by the Muslim Brotherhood interests as the best tool in the contemporary political climate of Canada to get its job done. You can read more of the expose surrounding Iqra and such events in Member of Parliament Iqra Khalid is an Islamist Hypocrite | TSEC.

Then on April 6, 2015 Slick Sick Samer and “the Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF) denounces the rise of hate speech and violent acts against Muslim women wearing the hijab.

“The rise of hate crimes and violent acts can create fear and possibly a feeling of exclusion among Muslims in the wider community,” says CMF president Samer Majzoub.

“We believe that discrimination and racism are against Quebec’s values ​​of equality, justice and freedom,” said Mr. Majzoub

“The CMF reiterates the importance that government and politicians have the political will to counter Islamophobia, further strengthen laws against hate crimes and conducting a major awareness campaign against xenophobia,” added Mr. Majzoub.

Here we see Samer tie Islamaphobia to the unnatural state of xenophobia. This condition is defined as intense or irrational dislike, hatred or fear of people from other countries, cultures or those who are simply strangers. He is way off base for there is nothing xenophobic about having some strong degree of trepidation about a religious-political-cultural system that is prepared to kill you if you do not submit to it.

But such word associations have their effects and many flee toward serving the Crush Islamophobia interests simply because they fear castigation of being labeled Islamophobic.

With the concentration of Muslims in key cities we see the MCF-CMF employing city government to advance their personal designs. They are actively trying to generate the beliefs that Islamaphobia is real, should be handled as they deign and the universal concern of all society participants. In particular, they try to create the ideas that they are ‘partners’ with the forces of law and order. July, 3, 2015 it is announced “The Canadian Muslim Forum welcomes the proposal of the city of Montreal to fight hate crimes.

“The SPVM (Montreal City Police) currently has processes and procedures to handle hate crimes. However, it should not be limited only to crimes, but also include hate incidents, since the concept of crime is too restrictive. The first step is to have a picture of the situation of incidents and hate crimes and to inform the public. It would be interesting that local police stations use, perhaps, their microsite to receive information when a hate acts are committed,” said Samer Majzoub, president of FMC.

It is crucial to encourage more citizens to report such incidents and hate crimes, and the police to adequately document and centralize their management to better understand these crimes, especially with the rise of Islamophobia. “Once the causes are well understood, all actors of society, including among others the SPVM, the city of Montreal, government and community organizations, may determine the best methods of prevention of such crimes,” adds Mr. Majzoub.

The CMF considers important that all hate crimes are included in the fight against racial profiling and all kinds of discrimination, including Islamophobia.”

September 23, 2015 we again see the ‘Muslim claimed as being deliberately political victimized due to race, culture and religious practices. The Liberal-Conservative divide is being purposefully widened to secure political clout through provision of Muslim support.

“For Immediate Release – The FMC-CMF deplores the political football sought by some parties regarding the wearing of niqab in the oath of citizenship and fueling the fear of Muslims.

“We are appalled and shocked by the position of some political parties that clearly oppose rights and freedoms and carries an Islamophobic tone towards Muslim community,” said Samer Majzoub, CMF’s president.

“The CMF adheres and strongly promotes the rights and freedoms, liberty of expression, belief and right of all citizens to choose their dress code,” adds Mr. Majzoub.

“The wearing of niqab during citizenship ceremonies does not prevent women to reveal their identities, for security reasons, before taking the oath,” he adds. The number of women wearing niqab is minimal in the Muslim community. The CMF lamentably denounces that this subject has taken an unjustified attention in the current Federal election campaign and has become a “weapon” in the hands of parties who seek political gain by fueling the fear of Muslims.”

But, the rising Islamic extremism ideology and presence of extremists is becoming of growing concern for some when in September 2015 “the City of Mississauga’s Living Arts Centre hosted the annual conference of the extremist organization Hizb ut-Tahrir. It was introduced as “Working Against the anit-Caliphate Propaganda” The first of two invited speakers was Abdul–Aziz Rasoul, who has been serving as the Principal of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) High School in Mississauga since 2010.

The constitution of the organizing group, Hizb ut-Tahrir calls for violent jihad and the domination of Islam over all other faiths and political systems.[4] This is in contrast to their public persona which otherwise calls for peaceful changes towards a global caliphate. The leading figure of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Canada has openly stated that all Canadian soldiers are war criminals and that Canadians Muslims should not vote, unless it is for Sharia Law” The City of Mississauga Extremism Problem: ISNA and Hizb ut-Tahrir

October 9, 2015 we see concerns to what degree the Liberal Party of Canada has been Infiltrated by Extremist Candidates.“Many Liberal Party candidates have extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and its front groups. Omar Algebra, Iqra Khalid and Kalil Ramal are the three most obvious, although others have similar ties.” This publication is so well documented that you cannot deny the fact that Iqra Shakid and her associates are 100% guilty of plotting treasonous actions under the Constitutional guidelines of our Nation. Some of Trudeau’s key ‘Muslim operatives’ that he has ensconced are fully exposed.

The call for the 42nd Canadian Federal Election was given August 4, 2015. The subsequent campaign spanned 78 days from the dissolution of Parliament to the election, one of the longest campaigns in Canadian history. And the Muslim Brotherhood pushed its propaganda every step of the way.

He gives his analysis that “Muslim Canadians felt and without prior notice that they have been used as a political football for election purposes.” Samer states that xenophobic and Islamophobic sentiments turned political debates into arenas where Islamophobia became a free-for-all scene and the niqab initiated by the Conservatives had back fired on them.

Samer states events in such manner that he lays claim that the ‘niqab debate’ “has been considered by many as ugly and horrible conduct by the Conservatives adopting a very divisive approach and rhetoric in hopes of winning the election.”

“The Conservative era in the last decade has been overshadowed by controversial policies in many aspects, but mainly by human rights violations under security excuses.”

Harper “bet big time on the niqab debate and lost. Canada is a great country by all means. It can’t accept bigotry, hatred and discrimination. Canadians, on Oct 19 2015, made it clear and loud: yes, to inclusion no to exclusion. The majority of Canadians chose the Federal political parties that have championed Canadian values of unity, harmony, equality and freedom of choice to represent them in the House of Commons. The election results will send a strong message to those politicians who have pursued campaigns of hate, prejudice, Islamophobia, fear and division amongst Canadians that they have harvested what they have planted, loss and defeat.”

“Muslims and Arabs have been problematized as not only a security problem, but as a socio-cultural problem in Canada.”

No, Samer, Muslims and Arabs have made themselves a security and socio-cultural problem in Canada through your treasonous actions toward my nation.

And, to plant the seeds that to stand up against the promulgating of Islam or to criticize Muslims in any fashion is Islamaphobia is just more of your ‘camel crap’. Do not be so asinine as to think that all Canadians are fearful of your strong propaganda message of ‘loss and defeat’ if they do not submit to your deceptions and lies. There is a clear message going forth to all Canadians to separate from all who endorse Islam, for your actions and beliefs remove all entitlement to any claim of citizenship within this nation.

“To start with, all sorts of violence is condemned. There is no excuse nor legitimacy for any type of violence what so ever.” Moron, we can read the words clearly in Qur’an and hadith to the opposite.

“The moment the attacker has been reported uttering the word “Allah”, right away, and without further delay, media starts dealing with the subject as “terror link”. In other word, since the attacker turned to be of Muslim faith, the word terrorism has to be up promptly.” Moron, moron, he was Muslim and the attack was terroristic in nature so why should it be handled otherwise?

“It has been reported that that the attacker has said “Allah Has asked him to do so….”. Basically, this is an issue that needs very careful attention. In Islam, the tradition of Allah speaking to individuals doesn’t exist at all. It neither in Islam’s doctrine nor in it’s culture.” Moron, moron, moron we can read the words clearly in Qur’an and hadith to the opposite.

“In this situation, the mental situation of the attacker should be taken into consideration. All sorts of violence looks for kind of legitimacy by the perpetrators. This even apply on those may have issues “mentally” speaking.” Oh, Moron, all followers of Islam have ‘mental issues’ through adhering to the commands to jihad given. And, Moron you are certainly mentally ill to think we swallow this attempt to sidetrack from the truth.

“As its becoming the norm, unfortunately, in such incidents, the hate mongers rush to raise their Islamophobic sentiments at certain media outlets and social media. Toronto police chief has warned of this trend…“I don’t want this categorizing a large group of people; that will be very unfair and very inaccurate,” he said, adding he doesn’t want to see any of this “Islamophobia nonsense.”

And, Morons we do not want to see anymore of your “Islamophobia nonsense” and special categorizing attempts of m-103. But we know you were a busy boy Omar, keeping the flames of malcontent flickering in many ways, eh? When fishing in clear northern Canadian water it is always interesting to watch the fish following the bait. To say the least, you got the M-n-M duet of NDP Mulcair and Green May swallowing it all, hook, line and sinker for they started blowing hot air bubbles in the manner you desired.

At the first presentation of the m-103 NDP Motion Condemning All Forms Of Islamophobia it failed to pass and the propaganda war raged onward. In this report we see many things including Omar Alghabra positioning himself and Islam to be the victims of discrimination, hatred and terrorism that he so vehemently hates himself. Read the report and watch the video clips of the Tom and Amar show.

And here is what the Canadian Muslim Forum president, saddened by the blockage had to say:

“Do I go and speak to my kids who were born in Quebec, in Canada, to tell them some of your representatives accept that you are being targeted, they are being discriminated, they are being attacked on the streets physically and verbally? They are being bashed… Because of your religious background or your culture. It is sad. It is outrageous,” he said.

Majzoub said he planned to come back with an even larger petition to make sure Islamophobia is denounced. Manipulation and propaganda carried onward. Because one does not give credence to special category for Islam as necessary does not mean they condone the actions that this moron says they do.

But all the standard Islamic propaganda propellers continue to spin. We see our boy Omar activate the bird brains that he knows will twitter after he published this tweet: “It’s sad that Conservatives denied to give a unanimous consent to a motion in the House of Commons to condemn all forms of Islamophobia.” And, naturally “he was taken aback by some of the hundreds of responses he claims were received on twitter and Facebook”. July 10, 2016 Omar Alghabra Faces Racist Messages After Criticizing Tories On.. blocking the m-103. All of this supposedly proved himself and Islam as undeserving victims of that monster of Islamophobia that the Conservatives refused to defend the innocents from.

And, as Slick Sick Samer stated from Montreal, Oct 7, 2016– The Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF) : “It was outrageous and sad to witness some Conservatives MPs blocking the unanimous anti-Islamophobia motion to pass in Parliament. However, the fact that the other political parties supported this valued move by the NDP to condemn prejudice and bigotry in Canada is an optimistic indication of the country’s legislators’ concerns that Islamophobia is a threat to the society and a total contradiction to human rights and Canadian values,” stated Mr. Samer Majzoub, FMC-CMF president.

Mr Majzoub added, “In a show of unity, both the federal Liberal ruling party and the NDP have openly expressed their profound disappointment over the Conservative’s refusal to endorse a motion that aimed to denounce hate speech and the targeting of citizens based on their religious and cultural backgrounds.”

Samer, your claimed ‘unanimous anti-Islamophobia motion’ is what failed to pass round one in Parliament and we know you immediately launched another propaganda volley the same date through your cohort Kathy Malas.

Oct 7, 2016 – The Canadian Muslim Forum (FMC-CMF) congratulates the tens of thousands of Canadians, from coast to coast, for their support of the petition requesting from the House of Commons to denounce discrimination, bigotry and hate speech.

“I do express my gratefulness for having Canadians from various communities sign the anti-Islamophobia petition. The solid support that petition got sends a strong message to our representatives at the Ottawa Hill to stand up against any sort of prejudice and hatred in Canada,” stated Mr. Samer Majzoub, FMC-CMF president and initiator of e-411 petition.

Mr. Majzoub added, “FMC-CMF and I would also like to whole-heartedly thank all the volunteers, community leaders, and activists for their tireless work toward promoting the e-411 petition all over Canada. Special appreciation goes to Mr. Frank Baylis, the Federal MP of Pirrefonds-Dollar, for sponsoring the petition and joining the effort to make it a successful project”.

Mr. Frank Baylis commented during at the closing hours of the petition, “I am so happy to see how Canadians responded to this petition. We live in a great country.”

CMF-FMC calls on all Federal political parties represented in the House of Commons to measure up to the expectations of all Canadians: to protect the dignity of all citizens, to be inclusive, to carry true Canadian values by taking a solid stance against all forms of xenophobia, and to adopt an attitude that condemns all forms of Islamophobia.”

“The fact that all Federal parties, Liberals, NDP, Conservatives and Bloc Quebecois, have united through this unanimous consent of condemning all forms of Islamophobia in Canada reflects true Canadian values,” said Mr. Samer Majzoub, FMC-CMF president.

Mr. Majzoub added, “The anti-discrimination motion that passed today proves that this dangerous social disease, after being recognized and denounced by Canadian legislators, should be addressed through clear policies and orientations that will put an end to this awful phenomenon.”

So, erstwhile Moron Samer, I guess it is now time for full recognition of the special status of Islam, eh? I say erstwhile Moron, Moron, Moron because you knew they had swallowed the bait, not because you are truly any less a Moron for thinking that your fishing lines won’t break Moron, Moron, Moron. You truly should not go fishing with such an obvious ball of rotted strings.

The Onward RESULTS of muslim-103 Super Catch

After our Canadian Lawmakers Unanimously Passed Motion 103 Condemning Islamophobia…The National Council of Canadian Muslims Executive Director, Ishaan Gardee, welcomed the anti-Islamophobia motion passed by the House, saying in a statement that it sent “a strong message” that discrimination is not acceptable in Canada. “We look forward to seeing how our parliamentarians will work concretely to combat this rising phenomenon,” he said, on Nov 3,2015.

The same misleading beeps and urging forward. It has already been shown that Ishaan Gardee and the NCCM are directly tied into the Muslim Brotherhood. So, how do you think that you should combat this ‘rising phenomenon of Islamic sharia bent propaganda’?

And, people are plainly told Nov 5, 2016 in Canadian parliament passes anti-Islamophobia motion that “Islamophobia is a trumped-up term designed to further an agenda, as indicated by Abdur-Rahman Muhammad, a former member of the International Institute for Islamic Thought, who was there at the inception of the term: “This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliché conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.”

But the truth is meaningless on Dec 5, 2016, the tabling day of e-411 and m-103. Take in the full measure of Iqra’s propaganda story of e-411 and anti-Islamophobia Motion-103 with video. ▶ Full story on huffingtonpost.ca

A lot of people with a lot of concerns and by Jan 5, 2017 Jihad Justin Trudeau is tied tight to Islamic radicals in #RIS2016 – Large Trudeau government delegation + Controversy.Other issues at the Reviving the Islamic Spirit (RIS) convention in Toronto, surrounding his government’s personages are documented as well. “In 2016, the Trudeau government was represented by Minister McCallum (Immigration), Parliamentary Secretary Omar Alghabra (Foreign Affairs) and four MPs: Yasmin Ratansi, Ahmed Hussen, Salma Zahid and Iqra Khalid. The endorsement given by Prime Minister Trudeau and several of his MPs to an annual event that has featured proponents of sharia and Islamic supremacism from its inception in 2003 and has been sponsored by organizations linked to terrorism is incompatible with the mandate of the Government of Canada to insure the safety of Canadians.”

January 30, 2017 – “The Canadian Muslim Forum condemns the terrible terrorist shooting in a mosque in Sainte-Foy against Muslims in Quebec and is deeply shocked…. expresses its utter dismay at the extremist attack…. Faced with the continuing and incessant increase of violent attacks on community places of worship in Quebec, violence is escalating and here we are, facing a massacre: fathers of families and young men shot atrociously by Barbaric shooters. The Muslim community in Quebec is suffering from a flood of hate attacks on places of worship and now the attacks are escalating and bringing back the death of innocent people. We firmly believe that such attacks are fueled by the Islamophobic sentiment and the smear campaigns that we have seen recently in the province. We call upon authorities to work hard to control the situation and stop these murderers from preaching violence in the country.”

From all the reports since, the individual that did the shooting was not known to have preached violence to anyone, was not charged under terrorism and appears to have been stimulated to his action of violence by the swelling numbers of Muslims in his province and the general results they were having. So why this particular mosque for his bang up? After all, Muhamad Yangui of the Islamic Cultural Center of Quebec City had assured the general populace that “Muslims love everybody” and touted the Mosques and their associations of being simply blessings and sources of community benevolence.

So, how could “fathers of families and young men be shot atrociously by Barbaric shooters”? Was there something different going on in the ‘haven of holiness’ or was it just all standard Islamic fare? Well, do you recall during the Islamaphobia hub-bub of reports about the protests outside the Toronto mosque and the RCMP on again-off again Hate Crimes Investigation? Well, the mosque is shown in the following video link located since and is preaching hate crime genocidal doctrine inside its sacred walls. Go ahead and listen to your family friendly men praying for slaughter of the filthy Jews. Toronto Mosque – Filth of the Jews > https://youtu.be/mPvlfanJHtI

Such prayer is part of the standard fare and practicing Muslims know it. But, the Muslim Brotherhood elements extracted every ounce of propaganda advantage and fear mongering they could out of the mosque shooting.

Feb 11, 17 Slick Samer sent our MP’s a message. TheFMC-CMF calls on Members of the House of Commons to Support Motion M-103“a motion following the condemnation of Islamophobia, adopted on the 26 October 2016…. This motion is essential to counter all forms of discrimination, including Islamophobia…. proposes an in-depth study…. this study is essential to detect the root causes of racism, discrimination and hate incidents and crimes. These causes need to be further disclosed in order to better target effective means and strategies to counter them. With Motion M-103, we will take affordable measures to limit, and even prevent and eliminate Islamophobia, and promote better living together.”

Then he jumped to encouraging his cohorts with a message posted on his web site titled an “FMC-CMF call to support Iqra Khalid for M-103.Stand up for Canadian values.” In it he asked people to “Send Iqra Khaled an appreciation and a thank you message for her stance on combating systematic religious and civic discrimination.”

Islam does not stand for Canadian values. Islam stands for sharia. And on Feb 15/17 it is pointed out the real threat behind M-103 is ‘mission creep’ In truth mission creep is a threat, and the truth is our Muslim Brotherhood Creeps are fomenting the unrest and political upheaval in process designed to ban all criticism of the abominations they represent.

The successful ploy of embroiling the political parties in issues surrounding Muslim matters was once again on the forefront of Liberal designs.

“For the federal Conservatives, the debate represents a potential political trap. During the last federal election, the party was branded as bigoted and intolerant for, among other things, proposing policies such as a “Barbaric Practices Snitch Line.” And while many Conservatives oppose Khalid’s motion on the grounds that it could lead to an abridgement of speech rights, the danger for that party is that its opponents will use opposition to this bill to brand the party, once again, as intolerant.”

Unable to show the moral fortitude necessary and call it for what it truly was, a pack of political cowards ultimately backed off, passed the motion and let the Muslim Brotherhood have its way to the determent of the nation.

After our young, brown, mouthy Muslim woman gave her defiant speech, following “the weekly Liberal caucus meeting Wednesday morning, a group of Liberal MPs assembled behind Khalid and Heritage Minister Melanie Joly where Joly announced that Khalid’s motion has the support of the Trudeau government.” M-103: Liberal Government Will Support Iqra Khalid’s Motion… The fullness of the use of the Quebec mosque shooting comes even more clearly into focus in the videos and this write up. It was however having more manipulative effect upon vote garnering politicians and dhimmi than many clearer thinking Canadians.

Also, on Feb 17/17 the Postmedia Network stated that M103 motion on Islamophobia needs to change its wording“Islamophobia needs to change its wording, but It’s disappointing to learn Liberal MP Iqra Khalid has zero interest in softening the tone of her controversial motion on Islamophobia.”

“OTTAWA – A Liberal MP Friday said the Quebec mosque murders were a “direct result” of the kinds of policies “championed” in recent elections by the federal Conservative party and the provincial Parti Quebecois. Chandra Arya’s accusation, made Friday in the House of Commons, was the latest attempt by federal Liberals to blame “elements” in the Conservative Party for a sharp rise in anti-Muslim sentiment in Canada.”

And, once again to the fore comes Samer Majzoub stating “Muslim Canadians are increasingly suffering prejudice and acts of hatred — including a deadly shooting spree at a Quebec mosque last month that left six worshippers dead — and that the problem can’t be tackled until it’s recognized for what it is: Islamophobia. Conservative MPs have argued that the Liberal motion singles out one religious group over others and could potentially curtail freedom of speech because it doesn’t define the term Islamophobia. Majzoub says those arguments are unfounded and are helping to create “xenophobic waves” against Muslims.”

Now, in this sequence we are fast approaching the date of March 4, 2017.

So, recall “Incitement to hatred? Incitement to hate crimes? and “Here is just some of a one day example of what Liberals and Muslims initiated through their activities in Quebec and furthered onward with their petition e-411 and motion m-103.”

I am ending our ‘time line’ showing merged intents at this point for evidence continues to be published daily as to what I have stated. Here is exactly what I mean, for the Liberal-Goodale intent displayed its bent again with the ‘retirement’ of CSIS director Michel Coulombe, one month in advance of Paulson at the end of May. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/michel-coulombe-csis-retiring-1.4023469

The Liberal-Muslim faction shall continue to foment in such fashions until, God willing, I see many of the individuals discussed before the Courts for their actions.

“On July 4, 2016, Windsor, London, Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal endorsed the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) “Charter for Inclusive Communities to condemn all forms of Islamophobia”.

The move was initiated by NCCM following a claim that hate incidents and stereotyping of Canadian Muslims is growing in frequency and intensity. In news conferences held across the country, NCCM was joined by dozens of community leaders, law enforcement officials, elected representatives from all levels of government and from all parties, “to denounce acts of Islamophobia and to vow to work together to build a more inclusive society”.

Two days before NCCM announced the signing of the “anti-Islamophobia charter”, the notorious annual pro-Iran Al-Quds Day rally was held in downtown Toronto.”

The National Council of Canadian Muslims has proven relentless in its propaganda push and many have endorsed its “Charter” to see their doctrine of banning ‘Islamophobia’ through legal redefinition enshrined. By September 28, 2016 we see the Hamilton City Council falls to their ploys http://en.cijnews.com/?p=49229 when they signed a motion brought forward by Mayor Fred Eisenberger to support the Charter against Islamophobia.

You had better click on the endorsed button once again and check out just how pervasive the NCCM has been and the range of individuals under their influence.

And, why did the NCCM chose the date of July 4, 2016 for their multi-city media endorsement? Why not July 1 in celebration of Canada’s birthday? Because the Muslim Brotherhood largely sourced into Canada from its American Headquarters channels as a movement to be totally free of all democratic North American constraints. For their followers, they were arrogantly announcing their successful North American Independence declaration on the date of the USA Independence Annual celebration, as they believed the victory they desired was now assured through Canada.

But, in spite of all their activity through every avenue of government a statement was made by Conrad Black on Feb 24, 2017 that Parliament can’t simply demand people feel good about Islam, and as the reports in the press since m-103 have shown, many people do not. Part of the Blackened statement was:

“There are several problems with the House of Commons private members’ motion 103 on “systemic racism and religious discrimination.” It is based on the assertion that there is a “need to quell” an “increasing public climate of hate and fear” and, implicitly, that the Parliament of Canada has the ability to “quell” it. I believe all of these premises are mistaken. I don’t believe that any such climate as the MP who presented the motion, Iqra Khalid (Liberal, Mississauga-Erin Mills) believes, exists.

Parliament cannot and should not aspire to turn the country into a judgment-free zone, a vast Pleasantville. Democracy is self-government and that cannot occur without the right of everyone to say and believe what they want, as long as it is not seditious, defamatory, or an incitement to illegal behavior.”

I concur with this opinion, but once again stress the fact that it is persons within the government itself that are doing exactly what the Canadian government should not be allowing them to do. The Liberal-dhimmi-Muslim Brotherhood elements within our Government are acting in seditious, defamatory manners that are both fomenting and inciting people to hate crimes.